METRO HIGHLIGHTS ENGLISH HYPOCRISY

Today's Metro was very interesting. On Page 2 we discovered that Gordon Brown was 'too Scottish' to be Prime Minister, however on page 42 Andy Murray is the 'best of British'.

Both are Scots but only one is now acceptable to the English.

Yet earlier that same week Andy wasn't acceptable to the English either. A column in the (English version of the) Sun explained:

"I'm beginning to weary at the outbursts of Andrew Murray, the young Scottish tennis player whose conceit is not regrettably matched by his talent.

His latest idea to prove his Scottishness (presumably mean and morose) is by announcing he will wear a Paraguayan shirt when England play against them in the World Cup. I quite understand Scots not liking the English, even dim ones like Mr Murray.

It must be painful to receive handouts to the tune of £30bn this year - money generated by the clever English.It must be painful for more and more Scots to leave behind the land of call centres and golf courses and head to London to find work - once again supplied by the clever English.

The latest figures from the 2001 Census showed there were 800,000 Scots living in England, and since the South East has continued to explode while Scotland - as The Economist points out this week - continues to decline, those numbers will have risen sharply from that.

It must be painful to recognise that these days all Scotland can export is national politicians (Blair, Brown, Reid) whose major skill set is telling lies.

So next time, Mr Murray, you are down south (possibly Wimbledon, although your first-round exit from the French Open won't have helped your ambition) perhaps you can try and work out how many Scots are in the stadium and, more importantly, who paid for their seats. And another thing, why do we carry the Scottish football results?"

Subsequent to this column Murray was targetted by English bigots because he dared to say he wasn't supporting England, the sickos were even slagging Andy for being a former pupil of Dunblane. Now he's proven to be more successful than Tim Henman however suddenly the Erits apparently love him.

What's the difference? Why are the English desperate to adopt Andy Murray while they are desperate to lose poor old Gordon? It's not as if Gordon is attached to Scotland, far from it, his favourite Goal is Gazza's against Scotland and it's not as if he's ever put Scotland before his career.

The answer is that England believes they deserve success. They have an imperialist mindset based upon their past position in the world. That's why they think England is the best football team. Why they can't understand why other countries like Scotland don't feel the same way about them (at least they don't if they are honest about it).

The Empire's over. We might still get people getting medals saying Member or Commander of the British Empire, bowing to the Queen and being tapped on the shoulder, but there is no empire any more.

Where does Scotland fit? We're all right if we pretend we're English and wave the union Jack and support England but if we attempt to push our own identity or have our own accent suddenly we're all ungrateful malingarers who are bleeding England's tax's dry.

What was our past status in the empire, were we partners? Er, no. We were supposed to be renamed North Britain, we were a colony who was threatened with Military force after our King decided that he preferred England's pleasant lands to Scotland's rocky mountains.

Brown also prefers England but he's still too Scottish. He's not like Tony who despite being born and educated in Scotland says he's English and acts the part. No Brown's still got an accent and might one day remember his principles (it's not likely but no-one in England wants to take the chance.)

Gordon wants his slice of the bigger cake which is why he's sold us out. But now the English don't want him, they still want Murray though, because he might get the success they crave and they can forget the uncomfortable fact that he's not English, he's Scottish.

We do have a Scottish Parliament but we also still have a UK Government which controls Defense , broadcasting and foreign affairs. If even a sell out artist like Gordon Brown isn't acceptable to the English then why should Scots believe we will ever be properly treated by their 90% of the UK parliament?

We don't need London rule to have sporting success. Remember the Commonwealth games? London rule is only good for those who prefer England to Scotland.

There will be another world cup campaign soon and I can predict the result, Scotland will battle bravely but we won't make it. Why? Because the World Cup is fixed. It's called seeding, big nations like England get an easy ride in, even though they never get very far (not in the last forty years or so) . We get lumped with France, Italy and Ukraine while England are always put in a group of easy teams.

Scottish independence may not help our football team but it will give us the political voice to make our own way in the world. Hopefully that will rub off on our football and rugby players, who knows?

What it would also do is let England know that their empire and their world power is gone. It would help them to adjust to their reality as a nation on the periphary of Europe who don't naturally deserve to have everything and everybody served up to them on a silver platter.

Maybe then England won't think it can still threaten other countries with nuclear oblivion if they don't behave, even though it's really the Yanks who control the button. Maybe Blair will realise he's not a US President.

We don't need Trident and we don't need Britain, it's days are gone.

Keep flying the Saltire Andy, because we won't turn on you if you lose a game of tennis.