On July 3 local time, the famous British scholar Martin Jacques continuously posted on his social networking site, publicly refuting the Western countries obstructing Hong Kong's national security laws.

　　Martin Jacques said that for Hong Kong affairs, does anyone feel that China has other options besides establishing national security legislation? Is there any country in the West that can tolerate violent sabotage in its major cities for several months? The fact is that Western countries will adopt the same approach as China. For violent activities, the West must bear its own responsibilities, and they are the driving force behind it-Western support is one of the key factors of the rioters. The West also dislikes shocking violence, sabotage and violations of the law and order, but this time it is pretending not to see it.

　　"One country, two systems" used to be and is now a great concept. This is a Chinese philosophy, not a British one. And the United Kingdom, a country that has never accepted the turn of the colonial history, likes to think of the "two systems" as a Chinese system and a British system. They pretend that Hong Kong belongs to the Western world. In fact, Hong Kong belongs to China, so Hong Kong affairs are constantly disturbed. It is now clear that the violent people not only have the support of the West, but also the support of the United States. Now that the imagination has ceased, China has maintained its sovereignty over Hong Kong.

　　At the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, China finally supported China’s new bill in Hong Kong with 53 countries supporting 27 countries.

　　Mr. Martin Jacques's article caused a heated discussion among netizens. Some netizens issued a "correction notice": "There are already more than 70 countries in favor of the new Hong Kong bill!"

　　△ On July 1, 53 countries of the United Nations Human Rights Council supported Hong Kong's National Security Law. On the day Mr. Martin Jacques issued a document, more than 20 other countries approved the Hong Kong-related bill.

　　Some netizens "disagree" with some of the opinions in the online article. A Western netizen named Barrier said:

　　"We aren't'pretending not to see' at all. The'five-eyed country' is just looking to reverse the facts! They called the Hong Kong riots a'peaceful democratic demonstration', but the peaceful black human rights demonstration in the United States was called'violence' riot'".

　　Netizen Kate from Canada used a grounded metaphor to accurately describe the relationship between the United Kingdom and Hong Kong’s national security laws:

　　"The UK feels that it's not funny to be able to intervene in Hong Kong affairs! The UK is like a tenant who has moved away. Do you want to prevent the landlord from changing the door lock? It should be optimistic about their own home!"

　　Of course, on this issue, netizens also commented on the United States:

　　"Why didn't the United States vote this time? I remember! They are not in the Human Rights Council....Why?"