Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Steve steveson wrote:And I think your being rude by dismissing my viewpoint as naive and peddling opinion as fact.
Because pretty much everyone involved or around the issue, who knows the MPs that rebelled etc, understands exactly why they did what they did. Nobody from an unbiased standpoint is under any real illusion as to what this was about and why the amendment was worded the way it was.
You shouldn't have any issuing providing some sort of citation for this, then?
And in any case, who cares *why* parliamentary sovereignty was restored, you should be glad that it *was*. That was the point of Brexit, wasn't it?
To be frank, if someone's trying to derail Brexit from within Parliament, I fully support them.
It is completely wrong for the 48% and the majority of people from the 52% who aren't hard Brexiteers, to be bounced into it through executive fiat propelled by a cabal of semi-private influences.
It's doubly true for MPs representing constituencies that voted Remain.
The reason why May does not have a majority is that she called an election to give her a good majority to support her Hard Brexit strategy. She completely failed. This shows that Hard Brexit is not what the people want.
Remember how during the campaign even Farage was saying 'nobody is talking about leaving the Single Market' yeah? 'Member? I 'member.....
Suddenly, we're leaving the Single Market - not something either side promoted or endorsed. So the people have very literally not voted for a Hard Brexit, because they were told nobody was seeking such a thing.
This is why we need a new referendum. Now things are beginning to crystallise, we the electorate need to be consulted from our position of greater clarity.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Remember how during the campaign even Farage was saying 'nobody is talking about leaving the Single Market' yeah? 'Member? I 'member.....
Suddenly, we're leaving the Single Market - not something either side promoted or endorsed. So the people have very literally not voted for a Hard Brexit, because they were told nobody was seeking such a thing.
This is why we need a new referendum. Now things are beginning to crystallise, we the electorate need to be consulted from our position of greater clarity.
This. SO MUCH THIS.
I still can't get over the Daily Heil having them on the front page, such a disgusting hate-filled mouthpiece. There were parties in the street when Thatcher died, I assume when Dacre dies the celebration will be seen from space.
Steve steveson wrote:And I think your being rude by dismissing my viewpoint as naive and peddling opinion as fact.
Because pretty much everyone involved or around the issue, who knows the MPs that rebelled etc, understands exactly why they did what they did. Nobody from an unbiased standpoint is under any real illusion as to what this was about and why the amendment was worded the way it was.
The old "everyone knows" argument...
Please tell me then why parliament should not get a vote on the final agreement? Or do you believe that we should accept whatever is offered, even if it involves paying £90billion, agreeing to the 4 freedoms, ongoing payments more than what we currently make, to retain access to various EU things such as are and research, but no ability to influence? (All of which is possible, but an extreme to the degree of a no deal exit) Or is your wish to prevent parliamentary scrutiny purely based on the assumption that any outcome will be acceptable to you?
I'm not sure you understand what the amendment entails. To clarify, the previous position was that Parliament would be allowed a vote on the deal; they either accept its terms or we leave the EU without a deal, which seems reasonable enough. The new amendment requires a seperate piece of legislation to be put through parliament, one which can be tied up and amended in turn. If that bill is changed then it effectively means the deal has changed and as such the government has to go back to the EU and get them to agree to a new deal, which they then have to put through their parliaments etc. It is designed to try and extend the process out for as long as possible. In theory (but unlikely in practice) it could be used to indefinitely delay the UK leaving the EU, which is why nobody is under any real illusion as to what this is about. It's not about sovereignty or the supremacy of parliament. It's about trying to prevent Brexit by any means possible.
So your argument is that you are confident that the deal won't be too soft, and if it is we will have a no deal brexit, which is fine by you.
I understand exactly what the amendment entails. It entails ensuring that there is proper scrutiny by parliament and it's sovereignty is retained, rather than a puppet parliament where in reality the PM has all of the power, with the ability to put forward a "my way or the high way" situation. As it stood we had a situation where the government could come to parliament and say "Which dog gak sandwich do you want? The one with peanut butter or the one with jam?". That is not genuine scrutiny. Parliament is sovereign and can do as it wishes. As someone who is pro brexit you should be pleased with this. I thought that was the point in brexit. Remain supporters are not the ones calling for people to be sacked or deselected.
Suddenly, we're leaving the Single Market - not something either side promoted or endorsed.
I don't know about that. A lot of remain supporters said we could not stay in the single market but drop the related fundamental freedoms, but that was called "project fear" and dismissed as nonsense, by people who were either ignorant or being disingenuous wit the argument "the EU can't stop us selling in to the single market" as if membership of the single market was the same as being able to sell to EU countries, even with huge restrictions and tariffs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/15 13:35:44
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
Kilkrazy wrote: To be frank, if someone's trying to derail Brexit from within Parliament, I fully support them.
It is completely wrong for the 48% and the majority of people from the 52% who aren't hard Brexiteers, to be bounced into it through executive fiat propelled by a cabal of semi-private influences.
It's doubly true for MPs representing constituencies that voted Remain.
The reason why May does not have a majority is that she called an election to give her a good majority to support her Hard Brexit strategy. She completely failed. This shows that Hard Brexit is not what the people want.
And the people were offered a platform back into the EU by a party that ran on a vote for us and we'll head straight back to Brussels, campaign.
That party got 12 seats out of 650...
We had a referendum, and the public voted to leave.
We had a GE and the people sent the pro-EU Lib Dems packing.
We had a court case that said that A50 needs Parliamentary approval, and parliament overwhelmingly voted in favour of activating A50.
The Government has won 35/36 amendments on the latest Brexit bill, and has promised a final vote on the deal...
So I don't know where this idea is coming from that people are getting bounced into Brexit.
The people have spoken. Parliament has spoken. What more do you need?
Remember how during the campaign even Farage was saying 'nobody is talking about leaving the Single Market' yeah? 'Member? I 'member.....
Suddenly, we're leaving the Single Market - not something either side promoted or endorsed. So the people have very literally not voted for a Hard Brexit, because they were told nobody was seeking such a thing.
This is why we need a new referendum. Now things are beginning to crystallise, we the electorate need to be consulted from our position of greater clarity.
Again, I can only say that it's a shame that a party, we'll call them Lib Dems for argument's sake, didn't run on that platform at the last election.
People could have voted for them. Oh wait, they did. Or except, they didn't give them that many votes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/15 15:03:12
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Herzlos wrote: Yeah, this has all played out pretty much in line with "project fear", with the exception of WW3 and a full blown recession.
It's depressing, but not surprising.
To be fair, no one claimed WW3 would happen, just that we would be less secure, which is a bit of an esoteric issue. Unless we go to war with the EU in the next two years it will be a difficult one to prove. For the recession, give it time. As pro-brexit supporters like to remind us, it's not happened yet.
Remember how during the campaign even Farage was saying 'nobody is talking about leaving the Single Market' yeah? 'Member? I 'member.....
Suddenly, we're leaving the Single Market - not something either side promoted or endorsed. So the people have very literally not voted for a Hard Brexit, because they were told nobody was seeking such a thing.
This is why we need a new referendum. Now things are beginning to crystallise, we the electorate need to be consulted from our position of greater clarity.
Again, I can only say that it's a shame that a party, we'll call them Lib Dems for argument's sake, didn't run on that platform at the last election.
People could have voted for them. Oh wait, they did. Or except, they didn't give them that many votes.
I know. It's shocking. The Lib Dems didn't get 48% of the vote. Its almost like people may have voted on more than one issue.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/15 15:14:34
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
Herzlos wrote: Yeah, this has all played out pretty much in line with "project fear", with the exception of WW3 and a full blown recession.
It's depressing, but not surprising.
To be fair, no one claimed WW3 would happen, just that we would be less secure, which is a bit of an esoteric issue. Unless we go to war with the EU in the next two years it will be a difficult one to prove. For the recession, give it time. As pro-brexit supporters like to remind us, it's not happened yet.
We had recessions when we were in the EU. Being in the EU doesn't make you immune to financial difficulty, the Greeks could tell you a thing or two about that!
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
I'm fully aware that I might annoy certain people on certain issues, but the risible performance of the Lib Dems at the last election, is something that gets my goat.
Whenever I mention that the pro-EU Lib Dems only got 12 seats from 650, people shift the goalposts and say there are other issues in a GE. Fair enough.
But we're constantly told that Brexit is the defining issue of the day, but nary a cheep from Remain supporters on the Lib Dems performance. Why didn't they rally to Farron if they support the EU so much?
Either Brexit is the defining issue or it isn't. You can't have it both ways.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Your implying a connection where there is non. For whatever reason many people voted remain but did not vote for the Lib Dem’s. No idea why, but that’s what happened. That doesn’t mean that these people are now anti EU.
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
You can't see why people who wanted to stay in the EU, didn't vote for the Lib Dems? You are aware they had other policies, and they were unpalatable to some, hense the voting.
Again, you are either educationally sub par, or a wind up merchant. It's the latter.
Herzlos wrote: Yeah, this has all played out pretty much in line with "project fear", with the exception of WW3 and a full blown recession.
It's depressing, but not surprising.
To be fair, no one claimed WW3 would happen, just that we would be less secure, which is a bit of an esoteric issue. Unless we go to war with the EU in the next two years it will be a difficult one to prove. For the recession, give it time. As pro-brexit supporters like to remind us, it's not happened yet.
We had recessions when we were in the EU. Being in the EU doesn't make you immune to financial difficulty, the Greeks could tell you a thing or two about that!
Talk about goalpost shifting. No one said that being in the EU protected you from financial difficulty, only that leaving is hugely damaging to our economy. What your saying is like saying “Why shouldn’t I sit in the middle of he M25? People get run over every day not siting in the middle of a motorway.”. Even the most optimistic outcomes put us losing something like 4% of GDP.
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
Kilkrazy wrote: Their inclinations in many cases are to access only the very large amount of "information" which confirms their existing views.
The very fact that so many other people seems to agree with them, helps to confirm their bias.
In modern social media, the "people" agreeing with them are often bots.
Agreed - but only having a small part of the "story" that's nothing new - the difference is you can get the info "if" you want to, so much more easily than ever before, now the difference is it might be swamped in a morose of other information - or it might just be too much effort for most of us to bother along with a general apathy toward politics - again nothing new.
People no doubt felt the same when they voted in Ancient Greece and Rome - those very few that qualified of course in the former and most of them didn't matter in the latter.
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
Herzlos wrote: Yeah, this has all played out pretty much in line with "project fear", with the exception of WW3 and a full blown recession.
It's depressing, but not surprising.
To be fair, no one claimed WW3 would happen, just that we would be less secure, which is a bit of an esoteric issue. Unless we go to war with the EU in the next two years it will be a difficult one to prove. For the recession, give it time. As pro-brexit supporters like to remind us, it's not happened yet.
We had recessions when we were in the EU. Being in the EU doesn't make you immune to financial difficulty, the Greeks could tell you a thing or two about that!
Talk about goalpost shifting. No one said that being in the EU protected you from financial difficulty, only that leaving is hugely damaging to our economy. What your saying is like saying “Why shouldn’t I sit in the middle of he M25? People get run over every day not siting in the middle of a motorway.”. Even the most optimistic outcomes put us losing something like 4% of GDP.
I've said many a time that it's foolish to predict anything, and that economic forecasts are like candles in the wind - unreliable.
I freely admit that we need, at a bare minimum, a solid 10 years before we can judge Brexit to be a success or failure.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Kilkrazy wrote: To be frank, if someone's trying to derail Brexit from within Parliament, I fully support them.
It is completely wrong for the 48% and the majority of people from the 52% who aren't hard Brexiteers, to be bounced into it through executive fiat propelled by a cabal of semi-private influences.
It's doubly true for MPs representing constituencies that voted Remain.
The reason why May does not have a majority is that she called an election to give her a good majority to support her Hard Brexit strategy. She completely failed. This shows that Hard Brexit is not what the people want.
And the people were offered a platform back into the EU by a party that ran on a vote for us and we'll head straight back to Brussels, campaign.
That party got 12 seats out of 650...
We had a referendum, and the public voted to leave.
We had a GE and the people sent the pro-EU Lib Dems packing.
The problem is you conflating how people voted in the GE to how they voted in the referendum and they are two entirely different things. The results would have been completely different if we had PR. In that case LD would have had much larger share of the seats, approximatyely 60. However you are happily ignoring that if MPs were voted in int he same ways PR was taken then Tories would nto be in power, LDs would have a sigificant say and we would almost certainly be having another referendum (and there would also be Green and SNP votes on top of this).
I've said this before I voted Labour at the GE not because I support their view on Wrexit but simply because I wanted to stop the nutcase Tories led by May with Emperor delusions taking us backwards to sometime in the 1950s. In that sense it is having some effect if not as much as I would have liked because May is doing everything she can to turn the Government into a Dictatorship. If I had PR I would have voted for a pro-EU party (proabably Greens). However in my area that is just a wasted vote and effectively worked against the prime aim of removing May and her cronies.
You've got to get round that the GE and Referendum were different ways of voting and hence are simply not comparable in the way you claim.
To be fair, no one claimed WW3 would happen, just that we would be less secure, which is a bit of an esoteric issue. Unless we go to war with the EU in the next two years it will be a difficult one to prove. For the recession, give it time. As pro-brexit supporters like to remind us, it's not happened yet.
But we are way behind in growth compared to the EU. That is a recession of sorts because the relative economic growth means that we are getting worse off. Recession and growth are too broad in reality as good comparisons. A recession is just when our growth contracts in two quarters, however relatively if our contraction is 1% and the rest of the world is contracting by 10% then *relatively* our economy is growing. However what we are currently seeing is that compared to the EU our growth is half that of the EU (and pretty much every other developed nation apart from perhaps Italy). That means our economy is shrinking relatively. From one perspective we already are in a recession (just not the one governments define as recession).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/15 17:31:13
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
I freely admit that we need, at a bare minimum, a solid 10 years before we can judge Brexit to be a success or failure.
Brexit is already a failure in every metric beyond reducing the number of foreigners. 10 years won't change that.
I'm willing to bet that we'll be trying to get back in the EU within 10 years of a transisional deal ending. All it'll take is a bad deal and a general election or 2nd referendum.
Herzlos wrote:You shouldn't have any issuing providing some sort of citation for this, then?
Sorry, but you must be the only adult in the country who doesn't see this at this point. I'm fairly certain that I could sit here, throw links at you from all directions, and you'll just sit there and say "proves nothing". I've already explained how if it was about sovereignty then there are many ways the amendment could have been worded to achieve that result without trying to put the permanent brakes on Brexit. At this point you're just willfully ignoring that and other points, so I'm not really sure what's the point in me going to any great lengths to try and provide you with citations etc. You have google, off you trot.
Kilkrazy wrote:To be frank, if someone's trying to derail Brexit from within Parliament, I fully support them.
Despite this being against the will of the people. How very EU.
It is completely wrong for the 48% and the majority of people from the 52% who aren't hard Brexiteers, to be bounced into it through executive fiat propelled by a cabal of semi-private influences.
Except everytime the press interviews Brexit supporters "on the street" most of them are hard brexiteers. I personally think we should use the time we have to negotiate in good faith with the EU and try to come to some kind of agreement. But there's little doubt that the main mood among brexiteers is to leave asap.
It's doubly true for MPs representing constituencies that voted Remain.
This sounds oddly like the SNP after the last referendum, trying to argue that the opinions of the losing side should hold as much weight as the opinion of the winning side, despite the whole point of the vote being to deliver a result that went one way or another. What of the Leave constituencies? If it had been a GE leave would have won a comfortable majority.
The reason why May does not have a majority is that she called an election to give her a good majority to support her Hard Brexit strategy. She completely failed. This shows that Hard Brexit is not what the people want.
It had a lot more to do with her disasterous manifesto and accompanying campaign. As people have mentioned later in the thread, if brexit was the issue that drove the vote then surely the Lib Dems should have romped to half the votes, being the only party that was promising a re-vote?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Suddenly, we're leaving the Single Market - not something either side promoted or endorsed. So the people have very literally not voted for a Hard Brexit, because they were told nobody was seeking such a thing.
See above for the general mood about hard brexit. It was made abundantly clear during the vote that staying in the single market meant accepting the four freedoms, which nobody on the leave side was prepared to accept. I think Farage et al suggested that we could seek a Norway type deal (EFTA) or Swiss model, but hard brexit has always been something on the table. It was well known before the vote that a failure to strike a deal would result in what we now term the Hard Brexit, so to pretend that people didn't know this was an option is completely disingenuous. It's just another of the "leave voters didn't know what they voted for, let's make them vote again, and keep voting again until they give us the right answer" type arguments. Again, very EU.
Steve steveson wrote:I understand exactly what the amendment entails. It entails ensuring that there is proper scrutiny by parliament and it's sovereignty is retained, rather than a puppet parliament where in reality the PM has all of the power, with the ability to put forward a "my way or the high way" situation. As it stood we had a situation where the government could come to parliament and say "Which dog gak sandwich do you want? The one with peanut butter or the one with jam?". That is not genuine scrutiny. Parliament is sovereign and can do as it wishes. As someone who is pro brexit you should be pleased with this. I thought that was the point in brexit. Remain supporters are not the ones calling for people to be sacked or deselected.
As I said to Herzlos, I've already explained how if it was about sovereignty then there were ways to word it to achieve that desired aim. I've also already explained how the UK political party system works. You're welcome to go back and re-read them
Herzlos wrote:Yeah, this has all played out pretty much in line with "project fear", with the exception of WW3 and a full blown recession. It's depressing, but not surprising.
With the small exception that none of their predictions have come true.
Whirlwind wrote:But we are way behind in growth compared to the EU. That is a recession of sorts because the relative economic growth means that we are getting worse off.
So now that the predicted recession has failed to materialise, remain supporters are now trying to redefine what recession means, despite this being a widely accepted economic term? You couldn't make it up. It's almost like you're wishing the economy would fail so you can go "look, see!" regardless of what impact that might have on families etc.
I honestly think I've gone about as far as I can on this specific issue. I don't see anyone on the remain side in this thread listening. You're ignoring things right in front of you and now trying to redefine economic terms to make a tenuous case. I think more heat than light is being generated at this point so I probably will only reply to specifc points, probably unrelated to Brexit from this point. A nice debate, albeit a fruitless one I think.
If you mention second edition 40k I will find you, and I will bore you to tears talking about how "things were better in my day, let me tell ya..." Might even do it if you mention 4th/5th/6th WHFB
There are times when I despair of this nation, but equally, there are times when I love this country.
God bless Yorkshire and all its people for putting some backbone back into Brexit, and sticking two fingers up to that rabble of Remain supporting MPs in the Commons, who are trying to keep us in the EU by the back door.
Common sense and plain peaking at its finest.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Kilkrazy wrote:To be frank, if someone's trying to derail Brexit from within Parliament, I fully support them.
Despite this being against the will of the people. How very EU.
Mate, Brexit was voted for by just over a third of the country. Don't try and dress up people getting their democratic representatives to delay an action they despise as some sort of evil plot to thwart what the majority of the country wants. A third of the country couldn't give a toss, and it is likely that if the vote was held again tomorrow it would be a 1% the other way,
Not to mention that 'The Will of the People' sounds like some sort of Neo-Communist punk rock band.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: There are times when I despair of this nation, but equally, there are times when I love this country.
God bless Yorkshire and all its people for putting some backbone back into Brexit, and sticking two fingers up to that rabble of Remain supporting MPs in the Commons, who are trying to keep us in the EU by the back door.
Common sense and plain peaking at its finest.
Gonnae stop pretending that not letting Maybot do whatever she damn well pleases with no scrutiny is the same as not leaving, yeah?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Kilkrazy wrote:To be frank, if someone's trying to derail Brexit from within Parliament, I fully support them.
Despite this being against the will of the people. How very EU.
Mate, Brexit was voted for by just over a third of the country. Don't try and dress up people getting their democratic representatives to delay an action they despise as some sort of evil plot to thwart what the majority of the country wants. A third of the country couldn't give a toss, and it is likely that if the vote was held again tomorrow it would be a 1% the other way,
Not to mention that 'The Will of the People' sounds like some sort of Neo-Communist punk rock band.
Yeah, I'm never going to understand the logic of "you lost the vote, so now you must bury your previous conviction FOREVER". It's not like the losers of a general election just shrug and say "well that's is stuffed, we'll try again in 5 years". Nope, they keep agitating against the winners. All the time. That's pretty much how it's supposed to work.
There seems to be a lot of fear from some of the Brexiteer side that Those Dastardly Remainers Will Take My Brexit Away From Me without a single ounce of appreciation that many on the remain side share equal horror that Those Vile Brexiteers Are Dragging Me Out Of The EU. It's "we won, no backsies" when if the result was the other way we'd probably be looking at another referendum in a decade at most...
Ketara wrote: [Mate, Brexit was voted for by just over a third of the country. Don't try and dress up people getting their democratic representatives to delay an action they despise as some sort of evil plot to thwart what the majority of the country wants. A third of the country couldn't give a toss, and it is likely that if the vote was held again tomorrow it would be a 1% the other way,
Not to mention that 'The Will of the People' sounds like some sort of Neo-Communist punk rock band.
If you don't vote in the referendum then presumably you're accpeting that whatever else people vote for, you'll be happy with. Otherwise you would have voted. If you don't like that, then vote. Of course I'm sure if Remain had won you wouldn't be talking about any of the people that didn't bother to vote who hoped we'd leave. You'd be telling them "welp, should have voted".
Honestly, some of the arguments on the Remain side just.... no words.
If you mention second edition 40k I will find you, and I will bore you to tears talking about how "things were better in my day, let me tell ya..." Might even do it if you mention 4th/5th/6th WHFB
