加方一些人在无任何证据的情况下大肆炒作“华为公司受中国政府控制，对加等西方国家安全构成威胁”，“中国法律要求中国企业协助政府从事间谍活动”。然而，他们却对有关国家设立“棱镜计划”、“方程式组织”和“Echelon”全球间谍网络并长期对外国政府、企业和个人进行大规模、有组织网络窃密和监听监控活动“选择性失明”，对有关国家凭借“爱国者法案”侵犯公民隐私视而不见，对“五眼联盟”国家政府公然禁止本国企业使用华为设备的“政府控制”行为摇舌鼓噪。中国制定的国家安全和情报方面的法律，大量借鉴了美国、加拿大和其他西方国家的相关法律条文。同样的事情西方国家做叫“维护国家安全”，中国做就是“从事间谍活动”。这是什么逻辑？

Some people in Canada, without any evidence, have been hyping the idea that Huawei is controlled by the Chinese government and poses security threats to Canada and other Western countries, and that Chinese law requires China's enterprises to collaborate with the government in espionage activities. However, these same people have conveniently ignored the PRISM Program, Equation Group, and Echelon-global spying networks operated by some countries that have been engaging in large-scale and organized cyber stealing, and spying and surveillance activities on foreign governments, enterprises, and individuals. These people also took a laissez-faire attitude toward a country that infringes on its citizens' privacy rights through the Patriot Act. They shouted for a ban by the Five Eyes alliance countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) on the use of Huawei equipment by these countries' own enterprises, which is literally a government-controlled action.

When making laws for national security and intelligence, China has drawn references from the relevant laws of the U.S., Canada, and other Western countries. Something is considered as "safeguarding national security" when it is done by Western countries. But it is termed "conducting espionage" when done by China. What's the logic?

　　加拉上美、英等个别国家就以“国际社会”的名义向中国施压，要求中方“放人”。难道屈指可数的几个西方国家就能代表“国际社会”吗？在动辄以“国际社会”自居的某些人眼里，非西方国家都不是国际社会成员，国际事务也只有他们这几个国家说了才算。

　　最近我常听到一个词：霸凌。有人说，中国抓了两个加拿大人，以报复加方拘捕孟晚舟女士，这是中国对加拿大的霸凌。在一些人眼里，中国的任何自卫行动都是对加拿大的侵犯。“当别人打你的左脸时，你要把右脸伸过去”，他们这样对我们说。然而，我从来没见过他们自己这样做过。

Canada, pulling a few individual countries such as the U.S. and the U.K. on its side, pressed China in the name of "the international community" to release its citizens. Do a handful of Western countries really represent the whole international community? To those would-be representatives of the international community, non-Western countries are not members of the international community and only their countries can call the shots on international affairs.

I have recently heard a word repeatedly pronounced by some Canadians: bullying. They said that by arresting two Canadian citizens as retaliation for Canada's detention of Meng, China was bullying Canada. To those people, China's self-defence is an offence to Canada. If someone slaps you on your left cheek, give him your right cheek, they told us. But I have never seen them doing as they said.

　　某些人之所以习惯于傲慢地采取双重标准，归根结底还是“西方中心论”和“白人优越论”在作祟。在这样的语境下，法治只不过是他们实现政治目的的工具，是在国际上推行霸权主义的遮羞布罢了。他们的所做所为不是对法治的尊崇，恰恰是对法治的嘲弄和践踏。

The reason why some people are used to arrogantly adopting double standards is due to Western egotism and white supremacy. In such a context, the rule of law is nothing but a tool for their political ends and a fig leaf for their practising hegemony in the international arena. What they have been doing is not showing respect for the rule of law, but mocking and trampling the rule of law.