"Jim, I have dismissed out of date historians because the consensus is recent (20 years)."
Prove it and stop alluding to it
I suggest you read Pennell's argument more carefully

"By the end of 1914 people in of England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland (north and south) had largely embraced the war, but the war had also embraced them and showed no signs of relinquishing its grip. The five months from August to December 1914 set the shape of much that was to follow and Pennell's research attempts to explain that twenty-week formative process.
No such surveys existed at the time so the book also marks the first-ever comprehensive public opinion survey of the outbreak of the war. It provides a detailed insight in to British and Irish popular reactions that challenges traditional understanding of public feeling at the time.
While historians in France and Germany have dismantled their equivalent myths of war enthusiasm, British and Irish responses to the war have remained largely unexamined. British people are often viewed as enthusiastic and the Irish often characterised as being disengaged.
Dr Pennell says: "Traditional views of public opinion towards the First World War are over simplified and inadequate. A series of retrospective myths have built up that suggest ordinary British and Irish people backed the war because they were deluded, brainwashed and naïvely duped into supporting the conflict. My research shows that this was simply not the case."
Whilst enthusiastic crowds certainly existed in August 1914, the new research suggests that this didn't reflect the whole picture. "Other gatherings around late July and early August opposed the war," Dr Pennell explains, "and many more people were shocked and disbelieving that such an event could happen."
"Once the decision to go to war was made on 4th August, the public rallied around what was perceived as a just cause. Their support was very often carefully considered, well-informed, reasoned, and only made once all other options were exhausted. People supported the war, but only because they felt it was the right thing to do "IN THE LIGHT OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES"
The circumstances where that Britain was committed to an Imperial war and political decisions left no alternative other than to fight - nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of tyranny - they were all a bunch of tyrants
I aske again, what gives you the right to quote tabloid journalists and reject our qualified ones?