Dave78

I don't think it's as clear cut as that. My understanding is that the Cass review excludes various scientific studies in support of 'gender affirming care' that other countries have included in their reviews, which led them to a different conclusion. Therefore it's not that the Greens are denying science, just the selective use of it.

I think this is correct. And even then 50%+1 at an election will only force Westminster to concede a proper legally binding indyref via section 30. Sturgeon's defacto indyref plan was the right move. Incredibly frustrating that her own and the SNP's implosion has scuppered that.

I didnae see it, but i'm guessing she wasn't asked about them? If i'm wrong, forgive me. It's just i see so many complaints about politicians not 'talking enough about'/'talking too much about' any given subject, all while they don't realise that what they hear is completely filtered by the media and their agenda.

I'm not sure journalists are guilty here. I'd cast my suspicion more towards the authorities, i.e. the police and judiciary (certainly in the Tory westminster cases). The polis by their nature tend to be conservative. In Scotland that probably translates to unionism. For the SNP, I'm fairly sure the tents were theatre. 'Political policing' to borrow a phrase from Northern Ireland. The timing may well also fall under that description. We'll see how that plays out re the election. All that said, Murrell may well end up being found guilty. I imagine it'll all come down to whether the 600k indyref2 fund can be legally argued as separate to SNP funds (i.e. the crux of bawbag Sean Clerkin's police complaint from 3 years ago that kicked all this off).

I first came across him about 25 years ago when he set up a networking event (called First Tuesday) for IT companies and startups in Scotland. He's been around the block and knows his stuff. Business for Scotland is vital to the Yes movement and doesn't get enough attention/support IMO. @Malcolm, BFS should be right up your street - https://www.businessforscotland.com/

Paul McGinn had crossed my mind too. He's filled in at RB for Clarke before. Could do so again?

BiS are the pro-indy organisation/party i fund, as they're the only ones that act like adults and try to rise above all the infighting.

There are only 2 people i can't stand to listen to, and immediately turn off what i'm watching / listening to. Her and Douglas Murray.

Always best to wait for the facts Mam, just the facts 😜

Are you calling me fat? 😜

Lewis Ferguson subbed off after 62 mins with an injury. Didn't see it, so i'm not sure what type of injury. Hopefully not serious

Except all these questionable policies haven't put people off independence, have they? At least not according to the polls. I ask again, exactly how does the SNP force Westminster to concede to indyref2?

Via what process exactly? Do you think the Tories, when faced with the referendum demand from the Scottish parliament, would have said 'Hmm, the SNP are running a competent non-divisive government, lets give them indyref2'? 😁

I listened to Alex Salmond's podcast on the way into work this morning. He was interviewing Wings re the HCA. I like Alex, and would have him back in charge of the SNP in a heartbeat, but it was quite something listening to the hypocrisy from him and Campbell, considering they both supported the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act, which was essentially the same thing as the HCA. In fact, comparing the response to both Acts from Yessers is quite informative. The unionist and media reaction was the same to both, as you'd expect, but the reaction from the indy movement very different. It really shows how divided and ruled we've become since the fateful Salmond/Sturgeon split. The People's Front of Judea were well ahead of the Yes movement. I mean, they even had a trans debate, look....

I honestly dunno what that means. Can you elaborate? Captured by who? Unionists?