三公大吃小的技巧（www.eth0808.vip）:中英社评/英国还以为现在是十九世纪？

三公大吃小的技巧（www.eth0808.vip）（三公大吃小）是用以太坊区块高度哈希值开奖的棋牌游戏，有别于传统三公开船（三公大吃小）棋牌游戏，三公开船（三公大吃小）绝对公平，结果绝对无法预测。三公开船（三公大吃小）由玩家PK，平台不参与。

　　黎智英涉嫌勾结外国势力破坏国家安全，正面临法庭的审讯。但在审讯还未正式开始之前，外国势力已千方百计地试图影响法庭判决。日前英国首相苏纳克甚至声称，英国「有权介入香港事务」云云，一副殖民统治者的傲慢嘴脸。必须指出，香港已经回归祖国四分之一世纪之久，英国在香港既无主权、无治权，也无监督权，没有任何权力干预香港事务。如果英国以为用这种方式可以替黎智英脱罪，无异于痴心妄想，实际上也是进一步加重黎智英勾连外力的客观罪证。

　　涉嫌违反香港国安法而被捕者不只一人，但没有任何人能像黎智英这样获得如此多外国势力的「关照」。自前年黎智英被捕后，美英当局不断以各种方式插手干预，既有所谓的「半年报告」，也有各种「听证会」，还有发声明等等，千方百计抹黑香港。日前黎智英的国际律师团队，以所谓的「黎智英拥有英国国籍」为由，要求英国当局「确保其获释」。英国外交部一名官员还会见了黎智英的儿子。显而易见，为求「捞人」，外国势力是怪招百出。

　　然而，这种明目张胆插手香港事务、赤裸裸地向法庭施压的做法，实际上起到的是完全相反的作用。这既撕下了美英所谓的「法治至上」的虚伪面纱，也进一步说明了黎智英勾连外国势力违反国家安全的控罪，具有无可辩驳的事实基础，试问：若不是具有重大的价值，外国势力何以独独青睐黎智英？这也再次说明，黎智英案涉及重大的国家安全风险，全国人大常委会对国安法的解释，完全必要必须，也十分及时，有效地堵住了国安风险漏洞。

　　英国当局或许看到「英国国籍」这张牌起不了任何作用，于是又改打「承诺牌」，其首相在国会发言时声称，根据《中英联合声明》，「英国有权介入香港事务」云云，好一个殖民统治者的「气派」，大概在苏纳克眼中，现在还是十九世纪、日不落帝国还能横行霸道、肆意入侵他国的年代。

　　香港是中国的香港，任何外部势力无权干涉。1984年签署的《中英联合声明》核心要义是确定中国收回香港，整份声明共1137个字、8个条款、3个附件，没有任何一个字、任何一个条款赋予英国在香港回归后对香港承担任何责任。英国对香港没有任何主权、治权、监督权，也根本不存在所谓的「承诺」。事实上，英国当局对此心知肚明，由始至终也拿不出任何一条具体条款来证明自己有此权力，只能是不断拿一些似是而非的套话来诓骗世人。

　　不论从基本的国际关系准则角度，还是从客观事实而言，英国当局都没有任何权力、任何借口干预任何香港事务。英方一再拿《中英联合声明》说事，只会再次暴露他们阴暗、过时的殖民主义心态，和打着人权旗号抹黑香港形象的险恶用心。

　　美英当局无视自身严苛的国安法律，反而指责他国维护国家安全，「双标」得令人可笑。中国政府维护国家主权、贯彻「一国两制」方针、反对任何外部势力干涉香港事务的决心坚定不移。黎智英涉嫌违反国安法，事实清楚，证据确凿，相信特区法庭会作出公正判决。外国势力为了标榜自己所谓「民主自由」的形象，不断借黎智英案「抽水」。不过，外力越是「撑」黎智英，实际上越是将他往死里推。

　　Does Great Britain think the present time were still in the 19th century?

　　Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, charged with collusion with foreign forces to endanger national security, is to be tried in court. Yet before the formal commencement of the trial, foreign forces are trying to influence the court ruling in every possible way. Just days ago, Rishi Sunak, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (UK), even made such a claim that Great Britain has the "right to get involved in" Hong Kong affairs and so on and so forth, showing the arrogance of a colonial ruler. It must be pointed out that Hong Kong has returned to its Motherland for a quarter of a century already. The UK has neither sovereignty over Hong Kong, nor the right to govern Hong Kong, nor the right to supervise on Hong Kong. It has no right whatsoever to get involved in Hong Kong affairs. If Britain thinks it could have Jimmy Lai exonerated in this way, then it simply tries to chase a rainbow. It in fact serves as further evidence to aggravate the criminal charge against Jimmy Lai for collusion with foreign forces.

　　More than one person has been arrested suspected of breaching the Hong Kong national security law, but no one else gets so much attention and gains so much care from foreign forces as Jimmy Lai. Since Jimmy Lai was arrested two years ago, the US and UK authorities have been doing everything possible to meddle in the case. There are so-called "six-monthly reports on Hong Kong", and there are also various kinds of "hearings" held and statements issued. They stop at nothing to discredit Hong Kong. Recently, Jimmy Lai's international legal team have asked the British government to "ensure his release" citing so-called reason that "Jimmy Lai owns British nationality". An official from Britain's Foreign Office even held a meeting with Jimmy Lai's son. It is easy to see that foreign forces are resorting to all sorts of weird tricks in the hope of helping Jimmy Lai evade justice.

　　Nevertheless, such a malpractice of interfering in Hong Kong affairs in such a barefaced way and exerting pressures on the court in such an undisguised way, in fact, is completely counter-productive. This has not only torn off the hypocritical veil of so-called "supremacy of the law" worn by the US and UK, but also further confirmed that the charges brought against Jimmy Lai of collusion with foreign forces to jeopardise endanger national security are based on undisputable facts. May we ask: why do foreign forces favour Jimmy Lai alone if he is not of great value for them? This once again proves that Jimmy Lai's case involves national security risks. Hence the interpretation of the Hong Kong national security law by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) is absolutely necessary and also very timely, which effectively plugs up the loopholes to minimise national security risks.

　　Maybe realising that the card of "British nationality" is of little use, UK authorities turn to play the card of "commitment" instead. Speaking in parliament, the British prime minister claimed that Britain has the "right to get involved in" Hong Kong affairs according to the Sino-British Joint Declaration, etc. What a "lordly manner" of a colonial ruler!　　Perhaps in Sunak's mind, the present time were still in the 19th century, a time when "the empire on which the sun never sets" could throw its weight about everywhere and invade other countries recklessly and without restraint

　　Hong Kong is China's Hong Kong, whose affairs no foreign forces have any right to get involved in. The substantial meaning of the Sino-British Joint Declaration signed in 1984 is for China to recover Hong Kong. Of the 1,137 words, eight clauses in the text of the declaration and of its three annexes, there is no single word or clause delegating Great Britain any responsibility for Hong Kong after the city's return to China. The UK has no sovereignty over Hong Kong, no right to govern or supervise on Hong Kong. Nor is there any "commitment" at all. As a matter of fact, the UK authorities are well aware of this. They fail to justify that they have such a right with any stipulation in the Sino-British Joint Declaration from start to finish, so that they have to resort to plausible verbalisms in an attempt to deceive the world.

　　Seeing it either from the perspective of the norms of international relations or from objective facts, British authorities have no right and no excuse to interfere in any Hong Kong affairs. The British side repeatedly making an issue of the Sino-British Joint Declaration once and again just exposes their gloomy, obsolete mentality of colonialism and their sinister intention to smear Hong Kong under the banner of human rights.

　　Ignoring their own tough laws governing national security, the US and UK authorities instead accuse other countries of safeguarding their national security. How laughable the way they apply "double standards" in this regard! Firm and unswerving is the Chinese government's resolve to safeguard national sovereignty, implement the "one country two systems" principle and oppose any foreign interference in Hong Kong affairs. The facts are clear and evidence irrefutable for charges brought against Jimmy Lai for breaching the Hong Kong national security law, and we believe the SAR court will make a fair judgement. To flaunt their own image of so-called upholding "democracy and freedom", foreign forces keep taking advantages of the Jimmy Lai's case. Nevertheless, the more support foreign forces lend to Jimmy Lai, the harder they push him into the abyss of death.