Mike Yardley positiveshooting.com

[gbal]

Matt,your question is ,of course,rhetorical-my spare tyre is in any case a bit lower than the tharacio-cardiac region. :-)

 

We had a world renowned Gynaecology consultant/Professor,who offered the following reassurance to mothers to be: he had complete confidence in his younger registrar,who had two children,and ,although he had not personally given birth,he had attended several thousand such events,and would be on hand,if needed.

 

Let's be clear about MY-from what I know,he would not be a good choice of advisor for any military small arms procurement.

From what Nick Parker said in his recent lecture,the Army at least,has a top heavy plethora of competent Staff Officers in the highest positions.(unfortunately,in his view,not primarily due to demonstrated leadership skill.)

 

I can only think MY has expressed-or maybe is thought to have-some view on quasi military rifles,and some civilian users,I'd imagine more directed to the more extreme contexts of USA.Perhaps he should not have done so,at a time of Corbin confusion/confuscation about lethal response to Jehadists on the streets of UK,or indeed any time.

 

I don't detect much bias in his shotgun reviews. And I've heard some unfortunate hot headed comments in the media from shooters,in response to anti gun/shooting extremists. Best avoided,if understandable. Our representatives-and plural is essential-need to be above such provocation-a slanging match does not help our cause (even-and it's not a given-we are all right all the time.It's also a 'political' context,or a 'seen to be decent citizens' one,in a fairly liberal,tolerant society.)

 

That's why BASC seem worth support,for example.Their response seems data driven,and measured,and civil,though firm where inaccuracies are paraded. That does get listened to,where it matters. It may not always be enough-but internal bickering about limited,if legitimate,self interest does not help at all. Think bigger picture.

 

Like Nick Parker.

 

gbal

[brown dog]

I really dont care what his background is. Whether it is genuine or not. Whether he is a Walt or not.

 

That's an oddly common British view. In effect it says

 

'I don't care whether an individual has personal integrity or is honourable'.

 

Personally, I prefer not to deal with people who lack integrity or honour.

[brown dog]

We had a world renowned Gynaecology consultant/Professor,who offered the following reassurance to mothers to be: he had complete confidence in his younger registrar,who had two children,and ,although he had not personally given birth,he had attended several thousand such events,and would be on hand,if needed.

 

Doesn't really read across. You're describing an individual who, in the field being discussed, is trained, qualified, vastly experienced, and, from a peer perspective, thus competent and current.

 

I think an individual who claims shotgun world championship success, is probably fit to comment with some degree of authority on shotgun matters. Rather less so on legal, military or matters of counter-terrorism.

[gbal]

Agreed-I havent been directed to much MY commentary on these matters-I did specifically say he was an implausible military small arms advisor!

I just wasn't aware he had overstepped his competency into counter insurgency or counter intelligence/anti terrorism(for which his Beirut anecdote would be just inapplicable,even if true).If so,there might be some negativity associated with shooting sports,and censure would be understandable-but not alienation,yet.

 

This wasn't helped by posts which seemed to focus on his alleged bad publicity for shooting sports,rather than issues of public safety in a jihadist scenario etc. There seems nothing in his CV that gives him any special insight on those matters.

 

Telling lies is not a good trait,if he did so.

Being honest is not the same as being right,of course,but generally,duplicity is deplorable.

 

All that said,MY is very small beer indeed in the UK's response to ISIS.The issue is not which one weapon is used to arrange their interview with god. There is sufficient choice.

gbal

[Breacher]

 

That's an oddly common British view. In effect it says

 

'I don't care whether an individual has personal integrity or is honourable'.

 

Personally, I prefer not to deal with people who lack integrity or honour.

 

 

More Irish really :-) A kind of laid back "Fcuk 'em - they are just eejits and eejits will be eejits" approach

One has to accept there are people like MY about. Individuals who tell tall tales. I have found it best to just challenge them, prove them wrong and then move on once everybody knows the individual is a fraud.

As I said, I will boycott him. That is NOT dealing with him.

[Robster]

On ‎21‎/‎11‎/‎2015 at 6:30 PM, brown dog said:

Here's why it didn't add up.

 

He dropped out of RMAS at his first go (SMC6) in 1976.

He then commissioned in July 80 on the 'DE' course (re-named to SGC for my vintage)

He then resigned his commission in 1981.

 

I'll run that again....he commissioned mid 1980, and resigned in 1981.

 

The minimum engagement is 3 years. To resign within a year is 'impossible' - there'll definitely be a back story to his resignation that won't be as simple as what he's claimed below. To release him early, the Army must have wanted to be rid of him.

 

 

If anyone is interested, Yardley went to Sandhurst twice. 
First time he dropped out due to injury or illness (if memory serves me right).
After doing a degree he went back and finished.
He then joined the 16/5 Lancers (my fault).
I met someone who was in the same regiment who said he was hopeless to put it politely.
So when he asked to resign the Army accepted with pleasure.
I am amazed he has never been called out on this particularly as he wrote several highly critical articles
and made himself very unpopular.
Also how he calls himself a defence analyst, security expert etc. is beyond me.
Must be any number of people far better qualified.

[Moorlander]

18 minutes ago, Robster said:

If anyone is interested, Yardley went to Sandhurst twice. 
First time he dropped out due to injury or illness (if memory serves me right).
After doing a degree he went back and finished.
He then joined the 16/5 Lancers (my fault).
I met someone who was in the same regiment who said he was hopeless to put it politely.
So when he asked to resign the Army accepted with pleasure.
I am amazed he has never been called out on this particularly as he wrote several highly critical articles
and made himself very unpopular.
Also how he calls himself a defence analyst, security expert etc. is beyond me.
Must be any number of people far better qualified.

So you served with him?

Yardley is a self serving *wat and no friend of law bidding shooters , best avoided .

 

[bradders]

1 hour ago, Moorlander said:

So you served with him?

Yardley is a self serving *wat and no friend of law bidding shooters , best avoided .

 

I served with him in the Poontang Delta in Bolivia in '68 when we HALO dropped behind enemy lines onto the Murcielago Glacier in Laos during the height of the Tet offensive against the Boko Haram revolutionaries from Serbia who had infiltrated the Golani Brigade in St Helena

You won't read about it in any history books though, it was all very hush hush

[Moorlander]

29 minutes ago, bradders said:

I served with him in the Poontang Delta in Bolivia in '68 when we HALO dropped behind enemy lines onto the Murcielago Glacier in Laos during the height of the Tet offensive against the Boko Haram revolutionaries from Serbia who had infiltrated the Golani Brigade in St Helena

You won't read about it in any history books though, it was all very hush hush

Gosh!

[Robster]

On ‎27‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 11:45 AM, Moorlander said:

So you served with him?

Yardley is a self serving *wat and no friend of law bidding shooters , best avoided .

 

No, although I was interested in joining the army and Yardley put me off.
I met him a few months after he dropped out of Sandhurst and we were quite good friends until just 
before he joined up the second time when we had a big argument.
But I knew a few officers who knew him or about him including one who was in the same regiment.

[Moorlander]

Dropping out of Sandhurst didnt stop our illustrious Army Officer writing a book about it https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sandhurst-Michael-Yardley/dp/0245544925/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

[Akeld]

3 hours ago, Moorlander said:

Dropping out of Sandhurst didnt stop our illustrious Army Officer writing a book about it https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sandhurst-Michael-Yardley/dp/0245544925/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

Not defending Yardley as I think he's a bit of a prat, but my brother co-wrote a book on the Holocaust art thefts and he wasn't there.  Just because he's a gobshite doesn't mean he isn't a good researcher (yardley, not my brother)

[Moorlander]

5 minutes ago, Akeld said:

Not defending Yardley as I think he's a bit of a prat, but my brother co-wrote a book on the Holocaust art thefts and he wasn't there.  Just because he's a gobshite doesn't mean he isn't a good researcher (yardley, not my brother)

I agree but I think Yardley has a picture of himself in DPM on the book cover    

[Akeld]

8 minutes ago, Moorlander said:

I agree but I think Yardley has a picture of himself in DPM on the book cover    

That aside, might I suggest everyone follows your link and reads the customer review

[VarmLR]

On 27/12/2017 at 1:00 PM, bradders said:

I served with him in the Poontang Delta in Bolivia in '68 when we HALO dropped behind enemy lines onto the Murcielago Glacier in Laos during the height of the Tet offensive against the Boko Haram revolutionaries from Serbia who had infiltrated the Golani Brigade in St Helena

You won't read about it in any history books though, it was all very hush hush

 

S'funny, I don't remember seeing you when Halo-ing in on the Poontang Delta bradders but then again, the camo and sweat mix was very effective and when the sweat wasn't blinding me the camo was probably hiding you  

Yardly is a muppet and is only taken seriously by those who couldn't be bothered to do a little digging and establish some credible facts.  Unfortunately for us, that describes half the population and almost all of our current politicians  

As for his comments in "military style" firearms, who cares what he thinks?  Next it will be "firearms with barrel-like protrisions" or those "nasty telyoscopic sights".  It's owners who are vetted, not the firearms.  If a responsible person has a pea shooter and a tactikewel rifle, he's use each one responsibly and within the law.

I find the moral compass of the media and the general public these days objectionable, twisted and in favour of social engineering and some people will do anything to get their voice heard or to sell a story.