Issue8 第一次，大家帮忙拍拍。

mamak6322UID: 189139

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

Hardly we can find any politician in the world who is a hundred percent honest and candid to the public. After all, politics is a game. One of its unwritten rule is that politician do not have to tell everything to the public. It is necessary for political leaders to withhold some of the information from the public. However, unduly withholding or even misleading the public can be counterproductive and dangerous.

At the first place, for the purpose of national security and public safety, withholding information is often necessary. For example, in the first few hours of millennium, the U.S pentagon’s missile defense system experienced an Y2k-related malfunction. The fact was withheld from the public until later in the day, once the problem was solved. It is entirely reasonable and correct for the government to do so since that immediate disclosure would have served nothing useful but mass panic. In the same way, when it comes to the issue of public safety, the government also has to think twice before broadcasting the information. Just imagine, if the government disclose the secret plan or strategy for thwarting the terrorism organization, the plan or strategy would surly fail, and the public safety would be in danger.

Secondly, for politicians’ personal career development, withhold some of the information from the public is necessary as well. As I mentioned in the beginning, politics is a game. In such a game, complete forthrightness is a sign of immatureness and naiveté, neither of which help earn a respect among his or her opponents or the public. So far as I concerned, if all the politicians were to disclose their personal foibles, character flaws, and personal life privacy, hardly anyone would be elected by the public to be a political leader. In fact, those personal scandals are like a timer-bomb to politicians, which can easily ruin their political career.

Admittedly, unduly withholding information or even misleading the public is not a wise option for the politicians. History informs us that those leaders or would-be leaders who tried to achieve their goals and seize power by deceiving and manipulating the public all at last earned a deserved ending. Examples such as Genghis Khan and Hitler come to our mind immediately. Maybe in a certain time period, they seemed to have climbed to the top of the political position, but at last they fell down rapidly and heavily. History teaches us a profound lesson. Those politicians who want to play well in such a game have to be aware of the power of the public. They can support you, and also can overthrow you.

In sum, the game of politics calls for a certain amount of discandidness, which to some extent is necessary to confirm the national security and the public safety, and is also necessary for the personal career development of politicians. Nevertheless, if a political leader wants to seize and maintain power by unduly withholding information or even misleading the public, he or she will surly be defeated by the public and ends up forfeiting the game of politics.

欢迎来拍。

mamak6322UID: 189139

leo1001UID: 185894

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

Hardly we can (can we ,用倒装吧)find any politician in the world who（用that，any引导的定语从句） is a hundred percent honest and candid to the public. After all, politics is a game. One of its unwritten rule is that politician do not have to tell everything to the public. It is necessary for political leaders to withhold some of the information from the public. However, unduly withholding or even misleading the public can be counterproductive and dangerous.

At the first place, for the purpose of national security and public safety, withholding information is often necessary. For example, in the first few hours of millennium, the U.S pentagon’s missile defense system experienced an Y2k-related malfunction. The fact was withheld from the public until later in the day, once the problem was solved. It is entirely reasonable and correct for the government to do so since that immediate disclosure would have served nothing useful but mass panic.（用的是北美范文中的例子，很巧） In the same way, when it comes to the issue of public safety, the government also has to think twice before broadcasting the information. Just imagine, if the government disclose the secret plan or strategy for thwarting the terrorism organization, the plan or strategy would surly fail, and the public safety would be in danger.

Secondly, for politicians’ personal career development, withhold some of the information from the public is necessary as well. As I mentioned in the beginning, politics is a game. In such a game, complete forthrightness is a sign of immatureness and naiveté, neither of which help earn a respect among his or her opponents or the public. So far as I concerned, if all the politicians were to disclose their personal foibles, character flaws, and personal life privacy, hardly anyone would be elected by the public to be a political leader. In fact, those personal scandals are like a timer-bomb to politicians, which can easily ruin their political career.

Admittedly, unduly withholding information or even misleading the public is not a wise option for the politicians. History informs us that those leaders or would-be leaders who tried to achieve their goals and seize power by deceiving and manipulating the public all at last earned a deserved ending. Examples such as Genghis Khan and Hitler come to our mind immediately. Maybe in a certain time period, they seemed to have climbed to the top of the political position, but at last they fell down rapidly and heavily. History teaches us a profound lesson. Those politicians who want to play well in such a game have to be aware of the power of the public. They can support you, and also can overthrow you.（是不是可以用一个非限定性定语从句，they有点指代不明）

In sum, the game of politics calls for a certain amount of discandidness（字典里没有的词，可以用partiialness）, which to some extent is necessary to confirm the national security and the public safety, and is also necessary for the personal career development of politicians. Nevertheless, if a political leader wants to seize and maintain power by unduly withholding information or even misleading the public, he or she will surly be defeated by the public and ends up forfeiting the game of politics.
我觉得整篇文章行文比较流畅，层次分明，错误不多。但是有北美范文的影子，希望作者能有自己的例子，并不是说借鉴不好，只是一定要用自己的语言，有自己的观点，因为 ISSUE240多道题不可能完全在脑中有印象的。（小弟拙见）：）

leo1001UID: 185894

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=299959

mamak6322UID: 189139

恩 说的是 我也觉得受范文影响很大 特别是距离方面 总觉得看了范文以后思路就完全被带走了 ，不看范文又感觉像不出什么…………而且 还是严重超时的。 ~~~

vickyqiuUID: 2114845

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

Hardly we can [用倒装吧can we] find any politician in the world who is a [用one] hundred percent honest and candid to the public. After all, politics is a game. One of its unwritten [潜规则underlying是不是好一些] rule is that politician do not have to tell everything to the public. It is necessary for political leaders to withhold some of the information from the public. However, unduly withholding or even misleading the public can be counterproductive and dangerous.

At the first place [是in the first place] , for the purpose of national security and public safety, withholding information is often necessary. For example, in the first few hours of millennium, the U.S pentagon’s missile defense system experienced an Y2k-related malfunction. The fact was withheld from the public until later in the day, once the problem was solved [这个例子是范文的也，建议换个例子吧] . It is entirely reasonable and correct for the government to do so since that immediate disclosure would have served nothing useful but [lead to unnecessary] mass panic. In the same way, when it comes to the issue of public safety, the government also has to think twice before broadcasting the information. Just imagine, if the government disclose the secret plan or strategy for thwarting the terrorism organization, the plan or strategy would surly fail, and the public safety would be in danger.

Secondly, for politicians’ personal career development, withhold [加ing] some of the information from the public is necessary as well. As I mentioned in the beginning, politics is a game. In such a game, complete forthrightness is a sign of immatureness and naiveté, neither of which [加will] help earn a respect [查金山好像respect都不可数] among his or her opponents or the public. So far as I concerned, if all the politicians were to disclose their personal foibles, character flaws, and personal life privacy, hardly anyone would be elected by the public to be a political leader. In fact, those personal scandals are like a timer-bomb to politicians, which can easily ruin their political career.

Admittedly, unduly [换为inappropriate吧，丰富一下] withholding information or even misleading the public is not a wise option for the politicians. History informs us that those leaders or would-be leaders who tried to achieve their goals and seize power by deceiving and manipulating the public all at last earned a deserved ending. Examples such as Genghis Khan and Hitler come to our mind immediately. Maybe in a certain time period, they seemed to have climbed to the top of the political position, but at last they fell down rapidly and heavily. History teaches us a profound lesson. Those politicians who want to play well in such a game have to be aware of the power of the public. They can support you, and also can overthrow you.

In sum, the game of politics calls for a certain amount of discandidness, which to some extent is necessary to confirm the national security and the public safety, and is also necessary for the personal career development of politicians [用not only … but also…吧] . Nevertheless, if a political leader wants to seize and maintain power by unduly withholding information or even misleading the public, he or she will surly be defeated by the public and ends [end] up forfeiting the game of politics.
[这个话题很难写出亮点，建议你在好好斟酌一下论据，模仿的痕迹有点重哦。加油，用词不错噢]

有空帮我拍啊 https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... type%26typeid%3D101

czhdsg008UID: 192133

Frankly speaking, i think what you wrote is not to the point , maybe there is some problems with your thinking .And your writing is not well organized and structured ,obviously,still need improvement.Let us progressed together.

mamak6322UID: 189139

谢谢vickyqiu ,我已经回你一拍了 ：）

czhdsg008 ，能说的再详细具体点么？ 不大明白如果改进哦~~