Madam, - The answer to the questions you posed at the start of Thursday's Editorial was given just two pages earlier in Susan McKay's brilliantly evocative opinion piece.
It is absurd to equivocate about Paisley's role in fanning the flames of hatred and violence in Northern Ireland. The facts speak for themselves. Paisley spearheaded opposition to the civil rights marches and his inflammatory rhetoric inspired the violence that characterised that opposition. No one doubts this. And directly as a result of this, the Provisional IRA was formed to defend Catholic communities.
The long litany of woes that followed could quite possibly have been ended long before now had Paisley chosen the path of peace and reconciliation earlier. The fact that thousands had to perish before he finally did seems a terrible legacy for a Christian minister to leave. - Yours, etc,
MICHAEL O'DRISCOLL, Blackrock, Cork.
Madam, - Irish Times journalists present what are described as the views of a "cross section of people" ("The Paisley years", Opinion & Analysis, March 6th), when in fact all 12 of these people are male. The term "cross-section" suggests a representative sample.
If 12 people are chosen at random, there is a 1 in 4,096 chance that all of them will be male. If only men's views are considered worth presenting, it would be more accurate to describe the sample as a cross-section of men's views. - Yours, etc,
KILDA TAYLOR, Royal Terrace West, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.