Two's in,
The changes that allow for all comers were accepted over two decades ago. This isn't a sudden pop up threat to the old days, its a Battle that has been won, a long time since. Therefore, what is the point in pursuing the subject by now trying to make having a positively enthusiastic view compulsory? Unless, the Chiefs of Staff are struggling with a constant litany of disruption and disharmony surrounding the matter, which if so, may require another ore subtle approach. Nobody should be giving a flying guff about how someone expresses themselves so long as they aren't being rude or uncharitable. This is a fetish not of the right, but of the progressives, nothing seemingly can be pushed too far, or in this case, pushed endlessly. As for the usual condemnation of the paper carrying the story, they've used the name of Colonel Richard Kemp, if they've made it up or misrepresented the man then they should expect a letter from his Solicitors in the days ahead. This isn't about encouraging all for one and one for all, it is divisive and provocative. We can always expect the likes of ER to try and shut down the Daily Mail or the Telegraph etc, while leaving the Guardian well alone, but I wouldn't trust them to achieve utopia, more likely a nightmare vision of Animal Farm!
FB