Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: I think Graves said something along the lines of "for the greater good" which is the punchline and motto of you-know-who-2. The whole speech he gave was reeking of you-know-who-2's ideology Also he attacked the ministry with quite expertise.. which ministry employee would do that? The way he interacted with Credence and how he egged on Credence to unleash his power. I'm sure with prior knowledge of the sort of person you-know-who-2 is.. it ticked off some alarm in Newt's head Or he could just be absolutely lucky.  <sep>  Q: What did graves say?

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: Finally found time to scan through the book. In it, Robert Highland is not an Inspector but rather a Sergeant. He is the #2 Scotland Yard officer working with the Sean Miller investigation after Commander Owens, although Owens thought he had a good mind for investigations and would make a fine Inspector some day. In the book version of events, Highland did not know about the schedule or route - they were picked by Commander Owens. Highland also did not have the conversation with Miller, and he survived the rescue despite being shot, remaining in critical condition with the bullet lodged near his spine. He then spent several months learning to walk again with a cane and leg braces. There is no indication in the book that Robert Highland was allied, or even sympathetic to, Kevin O'Donnell or his group of terrorists.  <sep>  Q: Was Inspector Highland the inside man? A: There is no indication in the book that Robert Highland was allied, or even sympathetic to, Kevin O'Donnell or his group of terrorists  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: When did the officers not seem to know what was going on?

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: I think it's deliberately ambiguous. If it's real, the inconsistencies are easily explained by Vidal's fascist belief system. These elements simply are not part of his world. If it's fantasy, then of course only Ofelia can see these thing because she imagined them. I think part of Del Toro's purpose in the film was to maintain the plausibility of both of these interpretations.  <sep>  Q: Is Ofelia just dreaming things to get herself in a fairy world? A: If it's fantasy, then of course only Ofelia can see these thing because she imagined them  Q: Are the things happening for real but visible only to Ofelia? A: If it's real, the inconsistencies are easily explained by Vidal's fascist belief system. These elements simply are not part of his world  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is going on in Pan's Labyrinth?


Output: No