\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tThe United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet released the latest "OHCHR Assessment of human rights concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, People\u2019s Republic of China" to the outside world at the last moment before leaving office. European and American media are very active now, and they seem to see hope to denounce the Chinese government's policies in Xinjiang. They believe that this report can be used as a powerful weapon.Is this really a report with sufficient evidence to show that the Chinese government is violating human rights in Xinjiang? The answer is negative. Actually, we can analyze this report carefully.First of all, we can analyze when and how the report of "OHCHR Assessment of human rights concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, People\u2019s Republic of China" was published.The report comes after Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, secretly released the report on Xinjiang at 5:51 a.m. on September 1, before she left office. According to relevant information,the report was published without authorization from the UN Human Rights Council.If the report is legally issued by the United Nations, why is there no Chinese version of the report?In fact, Chinese is also one of the official languages used by the United Nations, but there is no official Chinese version of a report on the investigation into China's Xinjiang, which obviously has other political purposes.Secondly, we can read the new edition of the Xinjiang Human Rights Report. Through keyword search, we can see that the most used keyword is "human rights", which is used 122 times, and "re-education camp" is used 112 times. Full of "detention, discrimination, torture, forced labor", and the information comes from various so-called "reported" was used 32 times, and "interview" was used 103 times, the tone keywords "may" was used 50 times, "indicate" was used 36 times, but the keyword "evidence" was used 0 times. This is just an overall analysis of the usage of keywords.In addition, we can see that the authenticity of the various reports from the information sources is unknown. The citations in the report simply do not guarantee a full and objective presentation of the facts. In addition, the Western governments and media believes that millions of people in Xinjiang have been subjected to human rights atrocities, but in the report, especially in the fifth part, it is mentioned that only 26 \u201catrocity victim\u201d in Xinjiang were interviewed. The numerical ratio is completely unreliable. European and American countries have always claimed to be very strict in academic reports, but this is not the case in the report released this time on Xinjiang. According to some investigations, the United States has long subsidized some so-called "victims of human rights violence in Xinjiang." All of these "victims" are criminals who only receive US dollars for their affairs.Thirdly, the report misinterprets Chinese law. The report simply cites anti-terrorism laws and regulations, without considering the background and reasons for the promulgation of laws, and makes speculative interpretations, which has a great Western bias. For example, The\u201d As such, there are concerns that the scope of the definitions leaves the potential that acts of legitimate protest, dissent and other human rights activities, or of genuine religious activity, can fall within the ambit of \u201cterrorism\u201d or \u201cterrorist activities\u201d, and consequently for the imposition of coercive legal restrictions on legitimate activity protected under international human rights law.\u201dmentioned in the report has the use of speculative words. In fact, in the report, such words were used several times to attack Chinese laws and the policies implemented by the Chinese government in Xinjiang.This latest "Xinjiang Human Rights Report" did not report on objective and comprehensive facts, but only on the basis of other so-called reports without factual basis, as well as the so-called "victim" interviews that did not pass real background checks. Under the manipulation of Western politicians, the smearing of China's Xinjiang issue is just a farce directed and performed by the West. From the release of the report to the hype of the European and American media, it is not difficult to see that this is a purposeful attack by the European and American governments against the Chinese government by manipulating the United Nations Human Rights Office. I suggest that these European and American human rights protectionists really go to China and China's Xinjiang. In reality, the Uyghur people, as a minority, actually enjoy the preferential policies given by the Chinese government, and their lives are getting richer and richer. Uniting the people of Xinjiang has never been an empty talk in China. Human rights reports in Xinjiang that have not passed on-the-spot investigation are in fact like a piece of waste paper. In addition, I also ask European and American governments not to focus on China's internal affairs, but to care about human rights in their own countries. The "Floyd Incident" in the United States is still vivid in everyone\u2019s mind.