Commentary: U.S. accusation over China's anti-terror legislation hypocritical, groundless

By throwing bricks over China's draft anti-terrorism law, Uncle Sam has once again defended its championship of "Master of Double Standards," reminding the planet that only the United States can steal a horse while others cannot even look over the hedge.

The draft, the latest attempt of China to address terrorism at home and help maintain world security, is by no means a "wicked legislation," as framed by Washington, to limit freedom of speech and invade privacy.

On the contrary, as Internet is frequently used by terrorists in planning and conducting attacks, some items in the law is completely reasonable and will not constitute a breach of citizens' privacy or freedom of speech.

It should be taken as a reinforcement and contribution to the global campaign of fighting mankind's common enemy -- terrorism.

In fact, the United States has already enacted similar laws in its territory, which not only require technology firms to hand over encryption keys but also allow intense security checks over foreign companies operating in America.

So, the accusation against China does no help America uphold its moral high ground. On the contrary, it makes Uncle Sam look pugnacious and overbearing on the issue.

In addition, by expressing concern over privacy protection under the draft law, Washington has once again made itself a hypocrite as its National Security Agency (NSA) had been collecting telephone metadata in bulk under the post 9/11 Patriot Act. Thanks to the revelation by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, the world has nailed Washington's double-faced tactics in mind.

Increasing terrorist attacks have posed serious threats to China's national security and the life and property of its people. However, China does not currently have anti-terrorism legislation, the lack of which has hampered its fight against terrorism at home and on the global sphere.

So in that sense, Washington's groundless accusation against China's legislation should be interpreted as a disruption of cohesion of the global anti-terrorism campaign.

Most importantly, the anti-terrorism law is a domestic affair of China. China is under no obligation to consult with other countries, and other countries have no right to tell China what to do.

All in all, throwing bricks toward China over home affairs dooms to be a double-edged sword for Washington. It might be easy to wave the stick of human rights, but it surely damages mutual trust that is vital to the world's fight against terrorism. Endi