Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold was not bullied, they actually jockers!

xDarkRazoR wrote:

Sabratha wrote:

I am the utmost, best informed and ultimate expert on the matter.
Deal with it.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You forgot "sexy" and an "amazing sense of humor".

Geez, some people can't even do good flattery these days.

Sabratha wrote:

xDarkRazoR wrote:

Sabratha wrote:

I am the utmost, best informed and ultimate expert on the matter.
Deal with it.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You forgot "sexy" and an "amazing sense of humor".

Geez, some people can't even do good flattery these days.

Sabratha is queen.

QuestionMark wrote:

Zortha wrote:

No, it's not comparable to the 9/11 hijackers, doofus. Al Qaeda was consistent in stating the motivation was due to US foreign policy and the targets reflected those. They didn't state multiple times that it had nothing to do with such policies; nobody is to blame; and then chose targets that had nothing to do with the US government. If they did THEN it would be comparable to E & D.

I find this quite funny because Langman - who you repeatedly cite and echo - wrote an article calling Osama bin Laden a psychopath with psychotic features. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nowhere does it state he was a 'psychopath' or 'psychotic'. He said he had psychopathology and his personality had traits like being avoidant, compulsive, masochistic, paranoid, sadistic, antisocial, and narcissistic; they are the same personality traits found in political & ideological mass murderers such as Breivik for example. That's not the same as saying someone has a psychopathic, sadistic or psychotic personality. In fact he says on page 1-2 that most mass murderers who are motivated by politics and ideology aren't psychotic. So you're attacking a strawman.

I didn't just cite Langman either, as I cited another paper by completely different researchers to prove my point: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Jeff Kass (who Randy has praised in the past) and Krabbe who've also published books agree that the cause wasn't due to harassment.

Meanwhile so many Columbiners gargle the ba11z of Brooks and Randy Brown and treat their words as the holy truth witnessed by Christ himself.

Brooks Brown is a known compulsive and chronic liar who was called out on it by Nathan Dykeman. His claim that the pair were 'outcasts' and 'losers of the losers' was contradicted by other close friends of the duo such as Dykeman, Laughlin, and Heckler. His father goes on the Reddit subs to spew blatant falsehoods such as E shooting D before he killed himself all while he gets circlejerked around by Tumblrbiners and upvoted. People will lay into Cullen over the Brenda Parker shit but will give a known scam artist who was called out by other closer friends of the duo a pass because it fits with the narrative they concieved and believe in.

The Brooks family are charlatans. I wouldn't be surprised if one of their ancestors sold snake oil or some crap back in the 19th century.

Zortha wrote:

Sabratha is queen.

Drag queen*

xDarkRazoR wrote:

Zortha wrote:

Sabratha is queen.

Drag queen*

Ok, that was funny.

It seems to me rather than bullying the van breakin arrest was the clear change in the timeline. It also seems they say it was. They had been stealing computer equipment from school. Dylan was caught with a stolen laptop. As a result, they were gamers who seemed to feel a smug sense of superiority over the knowledge gained from video games, specifically first person shooters. Then when they tried to steal in public, they got caught, on diversion/probation for their last summer vacation and grounded from the vidya, they swore revenge on the cops. Eric basically says what is gonna happen should have happened to the van guy.

Revenge on higher status classmates is there of course but seems an afterthought, and not something that requires bullying, just an achievement gap.

cakeman wrote:

It seems to me rather than bullying the van breakin arrest was the clear change in the timeline. It also seems they say it was. They had been stealing computer equipment from school. Dylan was caught with a stolen laptop. As a result, they were gamers who seemed to feel a smug sense of superiority over the knowledge gained from video games, specifically first person shooters. Then when they tried to steal in public, they got caught, on diversion/probation for their last summer vacation and grounded from the vidya, they swore revenge on the cops. Eric basically says what is gonna happen should have happened to the van guy.

Revenge on higher status classmates is there of course but seems an afterthought, and not something that requires bullying, just an achievement gap.

You're fucked up bro if you really think ''vaylent vidya gaemz'' inspired them to kill.

cakeman wrote:

It seems to me rather than bullying the van breakin arrest was the clear change in the timeline.

Agreed.

cakeman wrote:

Revenge on higher status classmates is there of course but seems an afterthought, and not something that requires bullying, just an achievement gap.

The thing is: It was not even revenge on higher status classmates. Because none of the victims were their classmates. The only person they really knew was Rachel Scott. Only Dylan knew her, only from the theatre and it is debatable if he saw her as "higher status".

If we go to Eric, Eric writes how he hates "rich snotty toadies at my school"But he is also pretty blunt about this being an attack on people with LOWER STATUS too. He is very explicit about his hate for people with physical and mental disabilities:

"KILL all retards, people w/ brain fuck ups, drug adics, people cant figure out to use a fucking lighter. GEEEAWD! people spend millions of dollars on saving the lives of retards, and why. I don't buy that shit like "oh hes my son though!" so the fuck what, he aint normal, kill him, put him out his misery."
And then in the library they proceed to kill kids with mental disabilities. Here's the writing, here's the action of the perpetrator. These match.

Eric cared far more about going after and killing people he calls "retards" than about killing bullies. That's a fact.

Its certainly true that who they shot was not because of status. I dont think rachel was even shot at first. I think patti was and rachel was unlucky for being close by and cornered. But either way, not for status. It was more kill em all for the high score. It seems only after settling on the attack that they want to build "more rage" and come up with more reasons and one might add achievement gap to that, rather than "bullying" as a side effect.

Also, the infamous food chain quip is from DOOMs playstation poster.

cakeman wrote:

Also, the infamous food chain quip is from DOOMs playstation poster.

Left-wing logic:

* Defend ''the oppressed minorities''
* ''More sex, less war''
* Be into Freud's theories
* Enslave humanity with sex and the consumerism
* Make white heterosexual men the most oppressed category of people as a ''good punishment'' for the alleged crimes they committed in the past against wimminz, Bumblebee and faggots
* Fight traditions and the Catholic Church so fucking hard
* <When a bullied straight white male commits a shooting>: Use ''violent video games'' logic (which is also used by rednecks, Catholics and ''concerned mothers'' you fight)

I have no more questions.