issue8 我的第一篇，请赐教

DeliaUID: 151415

"It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."

I concede that sometimes it is necessary for the political leaders to withhold information from the public. However, this political method, as a complement of forthrightness and honest, should be circumscribed.

Form substantial dishonest ambitious politicians in history, people nowadays are likely slide into a preprejudice that political events, if any opacity, there must be some unutterable trick behind the curtain. In industry countries where democracy has long been established and government officials are tampered under the scrutiny of check-and-balance system, withholding information from the public is somewhat risking the politician’s political authority, even career. For example, U.S former President Richard Nixon forfeited his political fame for enclosure his active role in the Watergate scandal.

However, with the ultimate goal to guarantee the favorite environment for the society to move smoothly and efficiently, government should proceed some action which otherwise would be regarded as dishonest or cheating. Politics, with a wide coverage ranging from economy development, diplomatic settlement and social spiritual construction which are ever changing and interplaying incisively, is complex. While the mass is less informed and unprofessional, some temporary details especially those which might have negative functions, are best left unsaid. This sort of dishonest might benefit the society. For instance, US government withhold the fact of the malfunction of Pentagon’s missile defense from the public in the end of 1999 until the problem was solved afterwards, the would-be mass hysteria was avoided which were to happen succeeding a immediate news release. And, in the process to pursuit a chief criminal, information should be kept until the criminal is arrested.

However, withholding information in some case is dangerous to the political leaders,  as mentioned above. such kind of well-intended dishonest is not always so successful thus understandable. Consider a controversial issue: Chinese government withhold the information about the SARS before it was widespread in 2003 in intention to avoid public panic, which is blamed internationally for bureaucracy and the communists’ nature egotism. It can be argued that if SARS had been controlled at the first place, then the releasing of the information is unnecessary, and the decision to withhold information would be a strategy rather than a guilt. This case suggests that careful balancing should be taken for the government officials before perform such action: First, the ultimate target should be obviously for the profit of the society with no suspicion for personal interest, which is the only approach to the forgiveness from the public. Second, the possibility to solve the problem successfully before it is disclosed by others—the ever changing reality or the opponents.

In sum, withholding information targeting at the well-beings of the society as a whole sometimes might achieve what is expected. However, this indecent political game might degenerate the political leader’s reputation. Political leaders who keep the information from the public, especially under the complex circumstance is a brave one, and should be careful.

LiunaUID: 150270

不好意思地说 本来想看看 改改的 但是发现还是学习了很多 写的很好
佩服阿

wglxhUID: 152604

两个HOWEVER的大转折要把读者带向何方？整体感觉不好，语法错误太多，有一些词用的不错，但是句子写的不好。时间有限，只改头尾。

I concede that sometimes it is necessary for the political leaders to withhold information from the public. However, this political method, as a complement of forthrightness and honest（这个词WEBSTER中没有名词意思）, should be circumscribed.

Form substantial dishonest （加：and) ambitious politicians in history, people nowadays are likely (加to)slide into a preprejudice that political events, if any opacity, there must be some unutterable trick behind the curtain.(句子结构错误） In industry （改industrilized) countries where democracy has long been established and government officials are tampered under the scrutiny of check-and-balance system, withholding information from the public is somewhat risking the politician’s political authority, even career. For example, U.S former President Richard Nixon forfeited his political fame for enclosure his active role(??) in the Watergate scandal.(第一段要说什么？两句话之间毫无联系）

In sum, withholding information targeting at the well-beings of the society as a whole sometimes might achieve what is expected.（整句话都没有主语，是CHINGLISH） However, this indecent political game might degenerate the political leader’s reputation. Political leaders who keep the information from the public, especially under the complex circumstance is（主谓单复数不一致） a brave one, and should be careful.

DeliaUID: 151415

谢谢鼓励和砖头。be likely to do somthing , 早在初中老师就强调了。呵呵，老师知道会敲脑壳的。

historywangUID: 149853

ISSUE8我在前几天练习过，看了Delia的文章我发现我们想到了论据都差不多（语言可比上Delia的啦：）），比如SARS等等。我对这个ISSUE的论据，另提出一个比较切肯的论据，就是美国总统林肯在葛底斯堡国家公墓上的演讲中的建立一个“民有、民治和民享政府”之言，所以我曾经这样写过：
The Former President of USA Abraham Lincoln had ever said in 1863 on the address of Cemetery Hill at Gettysburg that they should establish a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people”.(当时凭记忆写的，词句不甚准确)  我认为这是一个convincing evidence.

It is very easy for us to find the original text of The Gettysburg Address made by Abraham Lincoln. If you want to save time, you can click here
http://www.wjsgjzx.com.cn/person ... %A8%B6%FE%A3%A9.htm
where you will find the whole text and its translation.

forwwwUID: 154260

第一段感觉可以稍微概括一下你下面的论点，是不是这样会好一点？否则感觉开头单薄了点。一家之言。
呵呵，你第一篇已经写成这样了，很好了啊，我第一篇稀里糊涂的呢。呵呵。一起努力啊！

DeliaUID: 151415

太好了谢谢！
谢谢FORWWW'S 鼓励。 我一上机就慌，最怕第一段。wwww, 还差得远