Madam,- There is understandable annoyance at the manner of Mr Sarkozy's approach to diplomatic dialogue.
The French president's frustration merely reflects the widespread bewilderment of many Europeans, who now view the Irish decision on the Lisbon Treaty referendum as being breathtakingly illogical.
Of all the countries in the EU, we Irish benefited most from focused funding, which ensured our rise from the depths of dependency to pace-setters in an enlarged Europe.
The latest treaty would have put the seal on a package that was very favourable to the Irish people.
Almost all of our demands and opt-outs were acceded to. We happily signed off on a package that left many of our larger partners green with envy.
So what exactly did the No voters find so repugnant in the Lisbon Treaty?
Was it the old chestnut of neutrality, which Sinn Féin have been banging on about since 1972, and which anyone with a modicum of sense knows is absolute claptrap?
Ireland has a veto over any proposal with which it disagrees.
And Irish participation in any EU mission must respect our "triple lock" requirements of government decision, Dáil approval and UN authorisation.
But why let facts get in the way of a good old scare story that has been doing the rounds for well over 30 years?
Groups like Sinn Féin and Libertas were given the latitude to make outlandish, and often uncontested, statements on radio and on television.
Now that reality has begun to hit home and in the light of what we now know, these people should be invited to repeat what they claimed were factual statements, preferably in front of a panel of experts.
Our democratically elected leaders shirked their responsibility by choosing to saddle the electorate with the awesome task of making a decision on the contents of a highly complex document. They, and they alone, are fully responsible for the preventable mess in which we now find ourselves.
It is the duty of Government to see that the people are properly and truthfully informed and that exaggerations and lies are exposed for what they are.
The remarks made by the new president of the EU, while unhelpful, will have no bearing on the eventual outcome of any future talks.
But it is equally incumbent on our democratically elected Government to follow through on its mandate to make the hard and complex decisions on our behalf, rather than expose a confused electorate to a minefield of exploitable legal jargon. - Yours, etc,
NIALL GINTY,
The Demesne,
Killester,
Dublin 5
Madam, - Perhaps we should stop being oversensitive about the post-referendum remarks made by both President Sarkozy and Declan Ganley.
Both are EU citizens, their views are representative of separate and distinct segments of our EU community and they are continuing to talk about an issue that must be resolved one way or another.
Whilst Mr Ganley has come in for much criticism because he is not an elected representative, Finian McGrath's opposition to the treaty has not attracted as much attention.
Mr McGrath's support for this Government is so important that he has benefited from a secret deal and an untaxed party leader's annual payment of €25,000 per year.
He is, effectively, a Government partner and, as long as this arrangement persists, Mr Cowen should be asked to account for his opposition to the treaty.
If Mr Cowen is not willing to do this, then his claim that he would accept personal responsibility for the outcome of the referendum is meaningless.
Equally so, attention should be given to the ambiguous position of the Green Party on this issue.
The very half-hearted campaign by Green Party ministers was negated by the spirited opposition led by Green Party member Patricia McKenna.
Significantly, both Patrica McKenna and Finian McGrath were among the 18 people who spoke with President Sarkozy. - Yours, etc,
GEARÓID Ó DUBHAIN,
Clarkeswood,
Mount Oval Village,
Rochestown,
Co Cork.