Oh what a tangled web Mr Giuliani is weaving
THE statement by President Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani – ‘I’m focused on the law more than the facts right now’ – seems selfcontradictory, as surely the law is based on facts, even though politics seems to focus on fake news.
It is time to consider the ninth commandment, which basically says don’t lie, rather than the fifth amendment, which could be read to say: ‘I don’t want to speak in court as the truth may hurt me.’
Surely the truth should be the default approach for all people. We know there are political lies and there are some times, mostly involving military or police actions, when it is not always best to tell the complete story immediately, but they are the exception rather than the norm.
Perhaps it is appropriate to reflect on the insight offered by the words of Mahatma Gandhi: ‘Truth never damages a cause that is just’ – and to ponder on what truths are not being said or ‘misspoken’, and what damage that may follow. DENNIS FITZGERALD,
Melbourne, Australia.
Cycling dangers
JOHN Finn from Co. Cork suggested in a letter (Mail, May 4) that the wearing of helmets should be compulsory for all cyclists.
Writing as a person who has done a lot of cycling over the years, I did not feel comfortable with a helmet on my head. Although I’ve had a few tumbles, no serious injury was incurred as a result – perhaps I have a thick skull!
But, perhaps pedestrians using footpaths might feel safer with helmets on, considering the amount of reckless riding of bikes on the paths. Certainly, walking on the footpaths in my home town can be hazardous, with some fastmoving cyclists showing little respect for those of us on foot.
To make matters worse, people who make their feelings known about such law-breaking behaviour can, sadly, be the butt of some verbal abuse. PAT WALKER, Navan, Co. Meath.
A timely warning
PEOPLE Before Profit has said that if the Eighth Amendment, is repealed it ‘will settle for the 12-week limit’ for five years.
Perhaps this is meant to reassure voters, nervous about opening a Pandora’s box should they vote for repeal. Five years might seem very far away to some people. But all it proves is what the No campaign has been saying for some time: repeal of the Eighth is effectively a vote for abortion on demand. It is not about hard cases any more, if it ever was.
The current Government has already shown which way the wind blows with its ‘12 weeks for any reason whatsoever’ proposal – announced even before the vote has taken place! But with Article 40.3.3 removed from the Constitution, there is nothing to stop future governments introducing any legislation they wish, or being held to ransom to do so, even if that were to be abortion up to birth. The Eighth is the only obstacle to this. PBP has done the country an unintended service in reminding voters of this fact before they go to the polls.
NICK FOLLEY, Carrigaline, Co. Cork.
Voting concerns
I AM writing in relation to the news that thousands of students have recently registered to vote.
While I welcome the participation in the abortion referendum of all those entitled under Irish law to vote, I have a major concern regarding this matter.
Given that many students have both a home address and a rental address (where they are at college), there is a huge risk students could vote twice in the referendum by registering at both their home and away addresses. The long polling hours and the Friday voting day compounds the risk of large-scale double voting.
This raises the question: what safeguards, if any, have the authorities put in place to ensure that the basic rule of democracy, ‘one person, one vote’, is maintained?
Or does the fact that the majority of students would be expected to favour the Government side mean that this risk to our democracy will be ignored?
MARGARET HOGAN, Kilkenny.