Paranoid Schizophrenia or just a deluded CTer?

[Skeptic Ginger]

That is good. I would like your opinion about my case then. I work as a journalist in a dangerous area - people are threatened often. I have a letter from a researcher and a magazine editor who state that and these are posted on my website. Google: "Web of Evidence Clare Swinney." They are on the page entitled: "Held In A Psychiatric Ward And Called "Delusional" Because I Said 9/11 Was An Inside Job."

In 2006 I complained to the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) in New Zealand about the channel TVNZ's false claims about Osama bin Laden being blamed for 9/11 during a news program. The BSA claimed there was substantial evidence to show bin Laden was responsible for 9/11, even though the FBI stated they have no evidence to connect him to 9/11 and the official story had more holes in it than Swiss cheese by that stage. Thus, the BSA was obviously lying. Interestingly, they declined to determine my complaint. (If you Google my name "Clare Swinney" and "TVNZ", you can find the document to validate that this claim is grounded in reality.)
I persisted in complaining to the BSA and was in contact with activists about staging a protest. Not long afterwards I began to receive threatening e-mail messages, (which I have copies of) and messages from a someone on a social networking site that used a picture of a man holding a shot gun. I have a copy of that too. These are posted on the Internet to enable people to examine the hard evidence for themselves.
A few days after receiving the first threatening message I went into town, and while I waited at traffic lights a man dressed in black came right up behind me - in my space. There was no reason for him to have done so unless he wanted to intimidate me, as there weren't many people around. As we walked across the crossing, I got behind him and when we got to the other side of the crossing, he looked back to see if I was watching him and then began opening and closing his right hand, in a menacing manner. He did it four times and as I was mindful of the threatening messages over the Internet, I took this as a related threat. I told the police superintendent who was standing nearby that I believed my life was being threatened by the SIS because of work I was doing in relation to 9/11. He said he believed me. These details have been published in a magazine called Uncensored and they have not been contested.

I have been advised by a man in England who is a researcher, that he has heard of the techniques that were used upon me, e-mail threats and an encounter with someone who looks as if he is in the secret service, being used often to try and silence people in the anti-war and 9/11 truth movement. You can view his letter on my website also.

Shortly afterwards I was diagnosed as "delusional." However, I received an apology from the hospital in relation to this diagnosis in 2008 and this can be viewed on the Internet. There is a link to the apology on my website.

Could you please tell me skeptigirl, as you are qualified to judge, am I "paranoid schizophrenic"? If you believe so please provide the evidence for your claim. I am interested to learn from the "experts."

If this is an honest post, (as opposed to a troll post), I'd have to say your description is more likely than not, delusional paranoia rather than a realistic assessment of the events.

There is no reason you would pose a threat to anyone, even if 911 were an inside job. There are plenty of people who are convinced 911 is an inside job. No one is after them. Not enough people take them seriously. What unique reason would you in all the thousands of 'truthers' need and get special attention?


As for paranoid schizophrenia, that is not possible to diagnose from posts in a forum. One would need a much more thorough evaluation to make that diagnosis.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So how come you believe there were no WMDs in Iraq? Because the government told you? Because the mainstream media told you? I'm almost tempted to use the word 'sheeple' here.

I don't know about Tippit's reasons but for me, it's because there is an overwhelming amount of evidence from a variety of sources that supports the conclusion there was no imminent threat from Saddam and he did not possess any WMDs that posed a threat to the US or a threat which required the US to invade Iraq.

 

[Slayhamlet]

That is good. I would like your opinion about my case then. I work as a journalist in a dangerous area - people are threatened often. I have a letter from a researcher and a magazine editor who state that and these are posted on my website. Google: "Web of Evidence Clare Swinney." They are on the page entitled: "Held In A Psychiatric Ward And Called "Delusional" Because I Said 9/11 Was An Inside Job."

In 2006 I complained to the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) in New Zealand about the channel TVNZ's false claims about Osama bin Laden being blamed for 9/11 during a news program. The BSA claimed there was substantial evidence to show bin Laden was responsible for 9/11, even though the FBI stated they have no evidence to connect him to 9/11 and the official story had more holes in it than Swiss cheese by that stage. Thus, the BSA was obviously lying. Interestingly, they declined to determine my complaint. (If you Google my name "Clare Swinney" and "TVNZ", you can find the document to validate that this claim is grounded in reality.)
I persisted in complaining to the BSA and was in contact with activists about staging a protest. Not long afterwards I began to receive threatening e-mail messages, (which I have copies of) and messages from a someone on a social networking site that used a picture of a man holding a shot gun. I have a copy of that too. These are posted on the Internet to enable people to examine the hard evidence for themselves.
A few days after receiving the first threatening message I went into town, and while I waited at traffic lights a man dressed in black came right up behind me - in my space. There was no reason for him to have done so unless he wanted to intimidate me, as there weren't many people around. As we walked across the crossing, I got behind him and when we got to the other side of the crossing, he looked back to see if I was watching him and then began opening and closing his right hand, in a menacing manner. He did it four times and as I was mindful of the threatening messages over the Internet, I took this as a related threat. I told the police superintendent who was standing nearby that I believed my life was being threatened by the SIS because of work I was doing in relation to 9/11. He said he believed me. These details have been published in a magazine called Uncensored and they have not been contested.

I have been advised by a man in England who is a researcher, that he has heard of the techniques that were used upon me, e-mail threats and an encounter with someone who looks as if he is in the secret service, being used often to try and silence people in the anti-war and 9/11 truth movement. You can view his letter on my website also.

Shortly afterwards I was diagnosed as "delusional." However, I received an apology from the hospital in relation to this diagnosis in 2008 and this can be viewed on the Internet. There is a link to the apology on my website.

Could you please tell me skeptigirl, as you are qualified to judge, am I "paranoid schizophrenic"? If you believe so please provide the evidence for your claim. I am interested to learn from the "experts."

I searched your blog and could not find where you have posted the evidence for the threatening emails or for any of the messages or the username or picture of the person you said contacted you on a social networking site, nor even the name of that site. I saw the "apology" from the clinical director of the psychiatric ward, but it was only for any distress caused by your involuntary commitment to the ward. Nowhere is it admitted that you had been misdiagnosed.

And as for the incident with the man you thought was stalking you, I'm not sure what you mean by claiming it has not been contested. By whom do you mean? Was it not contested by Dr. Zubaran and others? Was not this story and other such potential indicators of a delusional disorder the reason for your commitment to the ward? As it appears to be based on nothing more than your own questionable interpretation of the event, I will say right now that I contest it, as does apparently skeptigirl. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise if you can present some more substantive evidence that you were indeed being stalked, and that the Internet threats were of a serious nature and connected with the incident. I have myself been threatened before on the Internet. It comes with the territory, unfortunately. Extreme political disagreements are an especially contentious area, and some people are just hot-heads. This doesn't just happen to people with anti-government positions. Mark Roberts has been threatened numerous times by Truthers, believe it or not, including prominent ones like Kevin "hang 'em high" Barrett and insane ex-pilot Rob Balsamo of Pilots for 9/11 Truth.

You also said nothing about what precipitated your involuntary commitment to the psychiatric ward. How did that come about? Why was there a judge involved in the first place? Had you had a prior history of mental illness? I'm not at all convinced that you were being kept at the ward for nothing more than your political beliefs (i.e. belief in "9/11 truth" and other conspiracy theories), and your suggesting such seems to me rather disingenuous.

I will not, however, make any judgment as to the legality or correctness of your involuntary commitment to the psychiatric ward. I am not in a position to do so, nor am I very familiar with the laws of New Zealand in regard to the involuntary commitment of mental patients. In my state (I'm from the evil, fascist U.S.) it must be shown to the satisfaction of a judge that a person (provided they're not a minor) is a serious danger to themselves or others before involuntary commitment is considered an option. That seems a reasonable standard to me. If the law is different in New Zealand and you were not in fact judged to be such a danger, then it is my personal opinion that you were wronged and New Zealand law is unjust in this respect.

 

[Orphia Nay]

You also said nothing about what precipitated your involuntary commitment to the psychiatric ward. How did that come about? Why was there a judge involved in the first place? Had you had a prior history of mental illness? I'm not at all convinced that you were being kept at the ward for nothing more than your political beliefs (i.e. belief in "9/11 truth" and other conspiracy theories), and your suggesting such seems to me rather disingenuous.

Slayhamlet, I distinctly remember reading a month or two ago about Clare Swinney (in conjunction with reading the blog post posted earlier), and I recall that she was initially committed because a family member believed Clare was suicidal.

That is a separate issue to being "committed because of political beliefs", and a serious, justifiable reason for being committed.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Just checking my facts, and it's actually in Clare's blog post that I read that:

"On the morning of June the 6th 2006, two social workers came to the door and advised that they’d come to take me to the public hospital’s psychiatric facility, as they’d heard I might be suicidal. Although I ventured to enlighten them I wasn’t, they didn’t listen as their unit had received a phone call from an ill-informed family member who’d said I might be on the verge of killing myself."

 

[Cuddles]

As already noted, this thread is not about Skeptigirl. Since the personal discussions have continued, I've dumped the whole lot to AAH along with replies. Please post on topic to the thread and don't bring personal issues into it.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles

 

[gtc]

Clare,

It is not possible to diagnose mental illnesses [including either delusional paranoia or paranoid schizophrenia] over the internet. If you have concerns about your mental health then you should visit a properly qualified professional.

 

[Brainster]

Just checking my facts, and it's actually in Clare's blog post that I read that:

"On the morning of June the 6th 2006, two social workers came to the door and advised that they’d come to take me to the public hospital’s psychiatric facility, as they’d heard I might be suicidal. Although I ventured to enlighten them I wasn’t, they didn’t listen as their unit had received a phone call from an ill-informed family member who’d said I might be on the verge of killing myself."

And here's how that family member became so ill-informed:

Subsequent to the encounter with the man dressed in black, I had a discussion with a family member about hypothetical scenarios and my very real fears, to the point at which I said that if it were between a man with a gun and tablets, I would prefer the latter. This was not about being suicidal, it was about preferring a non-violent death to a violent one.

I can't imagine how anybody could construe that as talk of suicide.

 

[Eos of the Eons]

My mom is schizophrenic and has her own personal delusions. She doesn't rant on about current CTs that other people latch onto. My brother, on the other hand, has an IQ of 80 and latches onto every CT out there. He also falls for many scams. He totally lacks any critical thinking, while my mom has a ton of it and is very smart, yet paranoid. I think if you have a schizophrenic that has a lower than average IQ, It would be truly interesting, but many people who buy into CTs have any kind of IQ. I just find my brother to be especially gullible, while my mom isn't. My mom will get vaccines, but somehow didn't bother with them when her kids were babies (I got measles and my younger normal IQd brother got mumps and whooping cough). I think she was just lazy, as she has no problems with vaccines, and as she gets older she gets the flu vaccine.

My mom is mostly paranoid of people she knows or thinks she knows. Everyone is out to get HER and cause her some kind of personal grief in various ways. If people are schizophrenic, they will talk about elaborate plots in which they are involved as well.

A personal involved in CTs usually latch onto ones they discover elsewhere rather than in their own head, and aren't being personally "picked on" in the extent that a schizophrenia will claim.

CT head cases will think people need to know things. When he visited me after the birth of my second son he tried to tell all the nurses that milk was the root of all our ills, they needed to know that! While my mom would be looking out for people who would be wanting to harm her instead, and probably only be telling me about it since the nurses would be in on it, and she wouldn't want them to know that she was "on to them".

I hope this makes some sense to clarify what I feel is the difference between someone into CTs and someone who is truly schizophrenic.