Irish people are at the bottom of the class when it comes to dissecting logical arguments so Truth-Watch.Today presents some basics in the context of Covid-19 to help them along….

To begin with consider the definition of the word “Fallacy”:

There are many types of fallacious arguments (seek them out on Google) but the most common ones used by the Irish Government and the mainstream media to advance their propaganda surrounding Covid-19 are as follows:

1: Argumentum ad populum definition: fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it

To understand how the Government and mainstream media manipulate the Irish people via argumentum ad populum we will consider some (fully cited) facts surrounding the numbers of asymptomatic covid cases and the likelihood of these people transmitting infection to others:

FACT #1: Director of the HPSC Dr John Cuddihy said: “According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 80% of all Covid-19 infections are mild or asymptomatic

FACT #2: To illustrate how transmissible asymptomatic people are consider this: In a post lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan in China 300 asymptomatic cases were discovered and none of the 1174 of their close contacts tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 – source citation here (go on, click on the link to verify what we are reporting is true)


For good measure (and in just case you doubted the above study) the British Medical Journal separately states that

FACT #3: Searching for people who are asymptomatic yet infectious is like searching for needles that appear and reappear transiently in haystacks” – source citation here

How Argumentum ad populum is implemented by the Irish Government and mainstream media to gaslight the Irish Citizenry into being active and willing participants in their own economic suicide.

  • Covid Restrictions are justified by Government because of ‘the high number of Covid cases’
  • Most of the Irish population believes that ‘a covid case’ is someone who is either sick or who is likely to transmit Covid-19
  • But [as TWT has shown above] : 80% of ‘cases’ are asymptomatic and cannot transmit SARSCoV-2
  • Since the majority of Irish people believe that ‘a covid case’ is someone who is sick or who is likely to transmit Covid-19, we now living in a scenario where [according to an Irish Times Poll], an aggregate of 77% of people believe that current or even increased levels of covid restrictions are justified and they believe this fallacy because everyone they know believes it too.

2: Argumentum ad hominem Definition, refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue.

Ad-Hominem attacks within the context of Covid-19 are ubiquitous:

Homework for the reader: consider the definition of argumentum ad hominem and see how it is used in this Daily Mail Article

A Typical Irish Example: rather than debate and counter the arguments of persons (even those with preeminent medical qualifications) that present hard scientific evidence that wearing masks is ineffective in curbing the spread of infectious disease, Government and mainstream media attack their character instead and insinuate that they are crazy by labelling them with pejorative appellations such as “Anti-Masker conspiracy theorist” – a classic ad hominem attack.

Government and mainstream media will not debate or even present the evidence that these people provide so Truth-Watch.Today will present it here to enable the Irish public to see the Ad Hominem trap that Government and MSM have set for them first hand:

American Frontline Doctors (labelled as “anti-maskers”) quote the Medical Literature on face masks (something Dail Eireann refuse to do) right  here

TWT adds some supplemental facts to boot:

What is written in bold text below might as well have been written about the Irish people:

“The New England Journal of Medicine, April 1, 2020 It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis. Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19”.

And from the Federally funded CDC:

“Masks do not prevent virus respiratory illness. Size matters! Viruses are 50x smaller than bacteria and 1000x smaller than a hair size of bacteria = 5 micrometer (5 μm) size of particles in wood smoke (wildfire): 0.4-0.7 micrometers (0.5 μm) size of virus = 0.1 micrometer (Influenza and SARS-CoV-2) (0.1 μm) comparison: human hair is 100 micrometers (100 μm) (one million micrometers = one meter)

CDC: “Cloth masks do not catch small harmful particles in smoke.”

Source data for the above from American Frontline Doctors:

And to put things in further perspective we have this next paragraph:

Virus particles are orders of magnitude smaller than smoke particles but masks do not protect from smoke:“Cloth masks will not protect you from wildfire smoke. Cloth masks that are used to slow the spread of COVID-19 by blocking respiratory droplets offer little protection against wildfire smoke. They do not catch small, harmful particles in smoke that can harm your health”


Danish Study proves ineffectiveness of facemasks but Governments around the world are suggesting you wear two of three of them.

3: Argument from authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), also is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority on a topic is used as evidence to support an argument.

The Irish Government present the NPHET as the only authority worth consulting on the merits or otherwise of Covid-19 restrictions but never debates professional advice to the contrary from people [whose qualifications far exceed the of members of NPHET] that organised the Great Barrington Declaration. At the time of writing this medical declaration has garnered over 50,000 signatures of medical & public health scientists and Doctors. Are you curious enough dear reader to look at the qualifications against each signature for yourself? The list shows that these are 50,000 people with unassailable qualifications. But the Irish people won’t hear anything from them via government or MSM because the argument in favour of Covid-19 restrictions comes from NPHET whom the Government and Mainstream media have set upon a higher level of authority than the moral and professional integrity of the Barrington Declaration signees. If the Irish public had the chance to weigh the professional advice of these 50,000 against the advice of NPHET there wouldn’t be any mask wearing, social distancing or lockdown.

Consider this: There is no historical precedent for a medical declaration to garner as many supporting signatures of qualified medical professionals as the Great Barrington Declaration and the people that signed to support it jeopardize their very careers in doing so. The reader should meditate upon that truth and its implications….

bold text

4: Argumentum ad baculum or “appeal to the stick“) is the fallacy committed when one makes an appeal to force or threat of force to bring about the acceptance of a conclusion.[1][2] One participates in argumentum ad baculum when one points out the negative consequences of holding the contrary position (ex. believe what I say, or I will hit you).

Examples of Argumentum ad bacalum implement by Dail Eireann include:

4.1) Various financial penalties (fines) for members of the public guilty of breaches of covid-19 restrictions.

4.2) Government seeks to prevent medically qualified persons that speak out against their dogma from making a living. Prominent examples include but are not limited to

The Irish people should beware that Dail Eireann are craven to the W.H.O. and further measures including mandatory quarantine where Irish people will forcibly removed from their families and homes and held in quarantine facilities are very probably in the pipeline.

(this has already happened in New Zealand)

5: Argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, is a fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent’s feelings of pity or guilt.

To illustrate this argument we replace the text highlighted in yellow in the above definition in terms of the Covid-19 restrictions:

Argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, is a fallacy in which the Irish Government tries to win support for Covid-19 restrictions by exploiting the Irish Citizenry’s feelings of pity or guilt.

  • “Your mask protects me” (i.e. if you don’t wear your mask you might kill me – have you no conscience?)
  • Stay at home and don’t go out even if you are so lonely you feel suicidal because you might spread covid to someone else (and that that someone might die) – have you no conscience?
  • Covid is spreading because young people want to socialise with their friends and its very irresponsible of them when they are in fact helping to spread this deadly disease – have they no conscience?