I woke up about a quarter to five with no indication that I had suffered hypnotising words. I have been getting a number of things done, all connected with, or certainly originating from, my website, that is in the main getting more of the stuff back up (eg from the 1970s) which formerly was available to my readers online. However, the latest thing doing has been copying from a DVD archive (Archive C1) onto my Vaio - now the computer most in use at home - because in looking at the layout (paragraph spacing again) of my website diary as it was in 2005 and 2006 and recalling that when I wrote the first version of my Rich Text Editor in June 2006 - the risperidone then having declined in its effect on me for some reason to do with us being more in Kingswinford than in Bassetlaw (Nottinghamshire) - the only way I found to space paragraphs was to insert between paragraphs containing text, empty font-size 8 pt paragraphs, I was thinking back to how my website was when it started as an AOL Homepage in 2003 and then turned into colinbrough.co.uk sometime in 2004. Archive C1 comes from my days on AOL around 2004 when I used to visit Bristol and was on friendly terms with Caroline.
Reflections have been brought back by saying all that, and particularly in relation to 2006 when I think I misinterpreted the playing-up of Dawn’s son’s stomach problem (so that eventually he had an appendectomy at Bassetlaw Hospital). I believed the reason it was done was to obtain from me commentary on the psychological aspects of it, that is Dawn’s concern for the well-being of her son, or even over-concern to tell the truth. Since 1980 I have presumed (rather conceited possibly) that the Experimenters were wanting my ideas on the human mind. After all, this was one of my main interests in the 1970s, following on naturally from the flourishing of my introspective nature on emergence from adolescence.
On the other hand part of the attempts in 2004 to ‘run me down’ and, I suppose, cause me to lose confidence in myself (one part of it was to try to embarrass me in AOL chat-rooms regarding my sexual naiveté and also to disparage what I thought I knew about the mathematical theory of clustering, going so far as to put up in the chat-room an expert who researched such topics at university but who to my dismay would not explain to me his ideas or his own knowledge: I had thought I might learn, but ‘the Authorities’ as they were then turning into weren’t interested in helping mankind or the general level of scientific knowledge: what they were after was me in a mental ward to be kept under wraps since I was no longer in the control - or under the ‘guidance’ - of Barbara, and Caroline had proved too volatile a potential guide or controller); as I say one part of the disparagement was in the autumn of 2004 to let me know through online conversations that I understood next to nothing about conventional psychology. Again, I think I come out rather well: it is an advantage not to know the erroneous ideas of conventional ‘psychological theorists’, and certainly to entirely disregard conventional psychiatry. Therefore (this is my argument, what I am on about here): it was not the case that those running the show - those giving directives to the usual staff at Bassetlaw that I should be medicated when in the ordinary course of things everybody would have known I need not be - were interested in my ideas on the human mind. What they were after was to get me in the grips of treatment on a psychiatric ward. It is, I must say, difficult to maintain a cool understanding of what must be the case, when I develop great fear based on the wrongs perpetrated against me, wrongs which have included medicating me excessively with antischizophrenic drugs at the behest of people who had unethical reasons for insisting: reasons which I cannot but continue to believe were to do with covering-up the wrongs preceding, in a kind-of avalanche of error upon error which became (in my view) not error but immorality and probably criminality.
In 2004 when I was detained at Bassetlaw mental unit a student doctor quite happily showed me pictures of various forms of restraint - patients in Eastern Europe in metal cages, set against methods involving subduing with injected medication - and asked me which I should prefer in case at some future date I needed to be restrained. Psychiatrists are trained up to expect this sort of thing, that patients will need to be restrained. Readers will understand my view, which is that almost all schizophrenic patients would not be in any way aggressive but for being restrained (that is held in imprisonment) and being given restraining drugs which more often than not give rise to a rebound of resentment if they are ceased.
Thinking back with more detail: I could almost regard the approach to me when I was initially compelled to have an injection while in detention at the end of 2005 as an act of provocation. Whether the person or people who had given directions that I should be compelled had in mind the possibility that my immense fear might cause me to blow up in violent resistance I do not know, but there was an independent nurse standing by as an observer (and of course on hand to subdue me if I had become violent in my terror). Again, I can’t see any justification for the provision of heavy police when I used to visit police stations to complain in 2007. I would not regard that as provocation since I regard the system which is the police as a fair system, even if there are occasional rogue officers, but the people misleading the police to the effect that I might become violent possibly didn’t realise this. They misunderstand practically every aspect of my personality and my behaviour, I must say, yet (presumably) they are people trained in psychiatry in well-regarded positions (presumably working for the Mental Health Act Commission).
Furthermore, I still cannot find any justifiable reason for trying to bar my attempts to publish the facts through my website. This started in 2004 when I was thrown off AOL seemingly for spamming, by sending numerous emails trying to expose what I had suffered through ‘The Experiment’. More recently an attempt was made to interfere with my choice of website host company. My attempts to alert Microsoft to the substitution of their websites through our Virgin Media internet connection with counterfeits have been stymied because the Royal Mail has acted in a very odd manner.
Jedenfalls, these reflections originate as I say out of Archive C1, in which (I mention) McAfee Security (on free trial with the Vaio) has detected Potentially Unwanted Programs derived through AOL the presence of these programs explaining the failure of computers I have had from the Packard Bell EasyNote (October 2006) onwards. It is regrettable that Norton Internet Security has never satisfactorily resolved this problem, so I am pleased to recommend McAfee as far and away superior to the possibly more widespread Norton.
No comments:
Post a Comment