Dave Cullen 's latest strike

Dave replied back to my email about his misprint in Vanity Fair :


Thank you VERY much.

I went back to the DVR and you're right. I'm very sorry, and we're correcting it now.

d

Dave Cullen
Writer

sororityalpha wrote:

Dave replied back to my email about his misprint in Vanity Fair :


Thank you VERY much.

I went back to the DVR and you're right. I'm very sorry, and we're correcting it now.

d

Dave Cullen  
Writer

Wow, Dave, you did the right thing for once. Good for you.

Ask him if he'll correct his mistake about Brenda Parker.

PaintItBlack wrote:

Undyne wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

eli27 wrote:

Undyne wrote:

People, you don't need a peer reviewed scientific article to see that Eric's behavior showed that he was deficient in the areas of empathy/remorse.

Selectively. He did show remorse to his family and friends in the final basement tape. One could argue that his (though selective) lack of remorse was because he was a psychopath, but then one could say it came from nothing more than a built up hatred towards most people. It is not conclusive proof of anything.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
Great post. I agree.
I used to pretty much say and think many of the same things as Eric did and I do not believe that I was ever a psychopath.
Sometimes peoples life experiences alone can bring them to that kind of hatred and anger.

If you believe that social forces are the cause of his behavior, then the word  you are looking for is sociopath.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
No, I don't believe it is.As I've spoken of before here, in my life, I came close to going down the same path Eric did  as a teen and I can't agree that I was a sociopath either.

It could be that not going down that path was due to the fact that you aren't a sociopath.

A lot of people consider or think about what E&D did. Life can be cruel, people can be cruel & it's human to get fed up with catching the BS sometimes & "dream" of revenge. What stops 99.9% of us from going "NBK" is our sense of humanity.

Actually, Father of Two, I don't think thats it.
Today,I had a conversation with my close and old friend, the very same one that had wanted to do the massacre with all those years ago,and we were talking about the show last night and what was said about Eric.Then we started talking about why he and then Dylan went through with it and we did not and we concluded that it was more a matter of circumstances than any inner, moral awakening .
We were certainly rageful and full of enough bitterness and hate to do it.
Finally, after hashing it out we came to the conclusion that besides not being able to drive at that time and all the practical concerns the biggest reason we did not was that we were afraid to die and afraid of being punished forever in the afterlife and Eric and Dylan didn't have those fears.

I know that doesn't make either her or I look good, but what can I say?
That's how we were and what was going on in our lives at that time.

Jenn wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

x5000x wrote:

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

The hate Cullen gets on here is ridiculous sometimes.

I know right? Really boring and some of the posters namely the one up there who everyone knows just go on and on about it. Part of the reason this forum is pretty much dead now and a lot of good posters left.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
Um, not all of us here think the Cullen criticism is boring. From what I've observed, more are interested in it than not. Lporter has been the most effective and dedicated Cullen critic that I know of and I feel that the anti Cullenities owe him a great debt in that regard.
I'm also not aware of anyone who has left especially for this reason.
These tragic events took place 17 years ago now and longer and there isn't always fresh and exciting new material to talk about.

We have not 'lost' any members due to Cullen debates. I have never even gotten a complaint about the Cullen debates. And believe me, people have no problems complaining about what's going on at this forum.

Members come and go. They lose interest and go. They may come back months or years later if the interest is sparked again. It happens all of the time. However the Top Contributor's list is pretty consistent. You will find the best of the best posters on that list and they've all been here for a very long time. In the entire time only about 4 people on the list have lost interest and dropped off the list.

99% of us were not involved in 4/20/99, yet hold a special interest & passion for the events & parties involved. We all vary to some degree as to why this peaks our interest, but in the end we share the common bond of being followers of a benchmark event in our lifetimes.

I think its extremely reasonable, justified & possibly required that we are committed to truthful & honest representation of the events leading up to, including & following 4/20/99. Revisionist history has already ruined 1,000's of historical events & God knows the media can pursued opinions @ their whim.. as if their is no greater example than CHS itself.

Cullen seized an opportunity to exercise his professional skills & cast his hand into the entrepreneurial game.. I respect that, but when someone as influential as he has become on the matter blatantly twists or ignores truths, it's fair game if not a responsibility to call it out & without reasonable limits.

Let the truth be known & most importantly... Never Forget.

Cullen fixed his mistake:

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

One of Sue's more jarring revelations was that Dylan asked her to buy him a gun. She scoffed and declined, and said she did not permit guns in her house.

PaintItBlack wrote:

Actually, Father of Two, I don't think thats it.
Today,I had a conversation with my close and old friend, the very same one that had wanted to do the massacre with all those years ago,and we were talking about the show last night and what was said about Eric.Then we started talking about why he and then Dylan went through with it and we did not and we concluded that it was more a matter of circumstances than any inner, moral awakening .
We were certainly rageful and full of enough bitterness and hate to do it.
Finally, after hashing it out we came to the conclusion that besides not being able to drive at that time and all the practical concerns the biggest reason we did not was that we were afraid to die and afraid of being punished forever in the afterlife and Eric and Dylan didn't have those fears.

I know that doesn't make either her or I look good, but what can I say?
That's how we were and what was going on in our lives at that time.

Thankfully both of you are still with us today.

sororityalpha wrote:

Cullen fixed his mistake:

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

One of Sue's more jarring revelations was that Dylan asked her to buy him a gun. She scoffed and declined, and said she did not permit guns in her house.

discussed this with my son today, he's a 17 yr old Sr in HS/likely the same period when Dylan made the request for a gun.


I wish Sue had gone into more detail.. I have to imagine it triggered some concerns & questions into "why" & "what for". Maybe it was edited, but Diane Sawyer certainly should have jumped on that.. if anyone wants to point out a moment where the parents should have recognized a serious issue, that was it (as well as the essay Dylan wrote, but to a lesser degree.. sounds like the teacher didn't do a very good job of explaining just how warped the essay topic really was*).

*I don't blame the parents, I could just as easily been in their shoes.. having said that, if I were the Harris' I would have searched Eric's room, car & everywhere else on a regular basis after they found the pipe bomb. If I were the Klebolds, I'm getting a copy of that essay asap.. & not relying on the verdict of the counselor. Admittedly, this is in hindsight & from afar.

Fatheroftwo wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

Actually, Father of Two, I don't think thats it.
Today,I had a conversation with my close and old friend, the very same one that had wanted to do the massacre with all those years ago,and we were talking about the show last night and what was said about Eric.Then we started talking about why he and then Dylan went through with it and we did not and we concluded that it was more a matter of circumstances than any inner, moral awakening .
We were certainly rageful and full of enough bitterness and hate to do it.
Finally, after hashing it out we came to the conclusion that besides not being able to drive at that time and all the practical concerns the biggest reason we did not was that we were afraid to die and afraid of being punished forever in the afterlife and Eric and Dylan didn't have those fears.

I know that doesn't make either her or I look good, but what can I say?
That's how we were and what was going on in our lives at that time.

Thankfully both of you are still with us today.

Thank you,Father of Two:)

Is it possible that Dylan asked Sue for the gun before the NBK plot, or at least before it started being seriously planned?
Maybe he asked for it because he wanted to only kill himself at that point and not others?
He did write something like that once in his journal-"I'm going to get so and so to buy me a gun and use it on a poor son I know named Vodka."

Its odd that he asked his Mom for one though.It seems like he would have tried to steal one first ,or maybe he didn't and his attempt failed?
I think he must have given his Mom some legitimate sounding reason as to why he wanted one  and that part was edited out which is very unfair because Sue should have been allowed to fully explain herself.
I just can't believe that he would ask and she would just say no and that would be the end of it.

Jenn wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

x5000x wrote:

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

The hate Cullen gets on here is ridiculous sometimes.

I know right? Really boring and some of the posters namely the one up there who everyone knows just go on and on about it. Part of the reason this forum is pretty much dead now and a lot of good posters left.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
Um, not all of us here think the Cullen criticism is boring. From what I've observed, more are interested in it than not. Lporter has been the most effective and dedicated Cullen critic that I know of and I feel that the anti Cullenities owe him a great debt in that regard.
I'm also not aware of anyone who has left especially for this reason.
These tragic events took place 17 years ago now and longer and there isn't always fresh and exciting new material to talk about.

We have not 'lost' any members due to Cullen debates. I have never even gotten a complaint about the Cullen debates. And believe me, people have no problems complaining about what's going on at this forum.

Members come and go. They lose interest and go. They may come back months or years later if the interest is sparked again. It happens all of the time. However the Top Contributor's list is pretty consistent. You will find the best of the best posters on that list and they've all been here for a very long time. In the entire time only about 4 people on the list have lost interest and dropped off the list.

I have had a 4 month break from posting. Not because I've lost interest (been viewing but not signing in). It was down to some posts but not the Cullen related ones.

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

Jenn wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

x5000x wrote:

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

The hate Cullen gets on here is ridiculous sometimes.

I know right? Really boring and some of the posters namely the one up there who everyone knows just go on and on about it. Part of the reason this forum is pretty much dead now and a lot of good posters left.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
Um, not all of us here think the Cullen criticism is boring. From what I've observed, more are interested in it than not. Lporter has been the most effective and dedicated Cullen critic that I know of and I feel that the anti Cullenities owe him a great debt in that regard.
I'm also not aware of anyone who has left especially for this reason.
These tragic events took place 17 years ago now and longer and there isn't always fresh and exciting new material to talk about.

We have not 'lost' any members due to Cullen debates. I have never even gotten a complaint about the Cullen debates. And believe me, people have no problems complaining about what's going on at this forum.

Members come and go. They lose interest and go. They may come back months or years later if the interest is sparked again. It happens all of the time. However the Top Contributor's list is pretty consistent. You will find the best of the best posters on that list and they've all been here for a very long time. In the entire time only about 4 people on the list have lost interest and dropped off the list.

I have had a 4 month break from posting. Not because I've lost interest (been viewing but not signing in). It was down to some posts but not the Cullen related ones.

Yes, you are one of the 4 I am referring to about dropping off the list. People take breaks (for whatever reasons) and that's fine. They're welcome back whenever they want. But in the 3 years I've been running this forum no one has ever complained about Cullen debates let alone leave/stop posting because of it. Not that I am aware of anyway and like I said before, people really don't have a problem speaking up when something on the forum bothers them.

Jenn wrote:

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

Jenn wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

x5000x wrote:

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

The hate Cullen gets on here is ridiculous sometimes.

I know right? Really boring and some of the posters namely the one up there who everyone knows just go on and on about it. Part of the reason this forum is pretty much dead now and a lot of good posters left.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
Um, not all of us here think the Cullen criticism is boring. From what I've observed, more are interested in it than not. Lporter has been the most effective and dedicated Cullen critic that I know of and I feel that the anti Cullenities owe him a great debt in that regard.
I'm also not aware of anyone who has left especially for this reason.
These tragic events took place 17 years ago now and longer and there isn't always fresh and exciting new material to talk about.

We have not 'lost' any members due to Cullen debates. I have never even gotten a complaint about the Cullen debates. And believe me, people have no problems complaining about what's going on at this forum.

Members come and go. They lose interest and go. They may come back months or years later if the interest is sparked again. It happens all of the time. However the Top Contributor's list is pretty consistent. You will find the best of the best posters on that list and they've all been here for a very long time. In the entire time only about 4 people on the list have lost interest and dropped off the list.

I have had a 4 month break from posting. Not because I've lost interest (been viewing but not signing in). It was down to some posts but not the Cullen related ones.

Yes, you are one of the 4 I am referring to about dropping off the list. People take breaks (for whatever reasons) and that's fine. They're welcome back whenever they want. But in the 3 years I've been running this forum no one has ever complained about Cullen debates let alone leave/stop posting because of it. Not that I am aware of anyway and like I said before, people really don't have a problem speaking up when something on the forum bothers them.

Yep. My issue was with something entirely different from Dave Cullen. The issue is still there (more so in fact) but I had a couple of points to make about the Sue Klebold thing so I figured I might as well just post as it's not going to go away.

Undyne wrote:

People, you don't need a peer reviewed scientific article to see that Eric's behavior showed that he was deficient in the areas of empathy/remorse.

*ding ding*

Only read a preview of Cullen's book but when he started describing Eric as this cool ladies man i was like

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

i thought forsure that had to be some type of humor on Cullen's part

Dave Cullen is beneath contempt - not because he created such ludicrous characterizations of Dylan and (especially) Eric in his book, but because he exploited a national tragedy for purposes of financial gain and personal aggrandizement. Of all the Columbine ambulance-chasers, he's the most loathsome, by far.

Let's be honest: Brooks Brown is, or at least used to be, pretty sleazy. His book is a worthwhile read, but the only reason he wrote it was to try to milk NBK for all it was worth. But at least he had a legitimate claim to having some connection to the massacre - he was friends with Dylan and ... enemies with Eric.

Cullen, on the other hand, was a two-bit hack - a "freelance journalist" who'd written pretty much zilch - who happened to be living in Denver on 4/20. He got lucky. He stumbled upon the story of a lifetime, and he rode it all the way to a considerable pile of money and a national reputation, with occasional national-television exposure. (For a while, he was popping up on CNN every time there was a new shooting spree.) That's a lot farther than most two-bit hacks ever go, so it's a noteworthy accomplishment.

He told me (in the one e-mail exchange we ever did) that he went broke writing Cullenbine, that the only money he earned before publishing the book was three thousand dollars for writing some story for Salon. I don't know how much he's earned from royalties, but it must be a decent-sized sum.

The man is a soulless profiteer with delusions of Truman Capote-ness. I sincerely hope that, one day, his book will be maligned as widely as it has been praised.

Dave Cullen was wrong about Eric sleeping with Brenda Parker, but he is right that Eric was a ladies man. I count 18 girls from the 11k that he was involved with or that liked him. According to studies, only about 60% of high school boys date, so Eric was far more prolific than other boys his age. By a huge factor.

Eric was a ladies' man.

As far as Dylan being a follower is concerned, the 11k backs it up. Heidi Johnson, Nick Baumgart, Tyler Chenoweth, Terry Lawson, Katelyn Place, Steve Trujillo, Dominick Duran, Michael Bierman, Leslie Burns, Jason Cornelius, Brett O'Neill, Roison McEwen, and finally and most importantly Devon Adams (10618) all say Dylan was a follower of Eric.

Dylan was a follower.

Moreover, every doctor who looked into the case diagnosed Eric with psychopathy. Dr. Peter Langman, Dr. Mary Ellen O'Toole, Dr. Frank Ochs, and Dr. Dwayne Fusilier all diagnosed him as a psychopath. Dr. Fuselier presented this diagnosis at the NVAVC conference in Leesburg, VA that the FBI hosted and the reviewers there endorsed it. The diagnosis was ultimately endorsed by Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopath.

You may not agree with these points, but Cullen supports them with a large amount of evidence, which is what journalists are supposed to do.

lasttrain wrote:

The diagnosis was ultimately endorsed by Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopath.

I once asked you to show me where you found this information but you never responded. I can find no evidence online that it's true.

sscc wrote:

I once asked you to show me where you found this information but you never responded. I can find no evidence online that it's true.

He is disgusted with the morons around him. These are not the rantings of an angry young man, picked on by jocks until he's not going to take it anymore. These are the rantings of someone with a messianic-grade superiority complex, out to punish the entire human race for its appalling inferiority. It may look like hate, but "It's more about demeaning other people," says Hare.

sscc wrote:

lasttrain wrote:

The diagnosis was ultimately endorsed by Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopath.

I once asked you to show me where you found this information but you never responded. I can find no evidence online that it's true.

It's here on his personal site:

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

lasttrain wrote:

sscc wrote:

lasttrain wrote:

The diagnosis was ultimately endorsed by Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopath.

I once asked you to show me where you found this information but you never responded. I can find no evidence online that it's true.

It's here on his personal site:

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

I know Cullen's article is is there but as I pointed out before, it says this.

"The following links are provided, without comment, to illustrate the coverage given to the topic of psychopathy in the media, and are strictly for interest sake."
"*NOTE: Some of Dr. Hare's work was used by the investigators and the writer but Dr. Hare was not directly involved in the psychological assessments."

There is no endorsement and he puts a special note on this article to make readers aware that he was not directly involved in the assessment. I think saying that he endorses the diagnosis is a misrepresentation of what is there.

PredBull wrote:

sscc wrote:

I once asked you to show me where you found this information but you never responded. I can find no evidence online that it's true.

He is disgusted with the morons around him. These are not the rantings of an angry young man, picked on by jocks until he's not going to take it anymore. These are the rantings of someone with a messianic-grade superiority complex, out to punish the entire human race for its appalling inferiority. It may look like hate, but "It's more about demeaning other people," says Hare.

This quote was also included in the article:
"Because of their inability to appreciate the feelings of others, some psychopaths are capable of behavior that normal people find not only horrific but baffling. For example, they can torture and mutilate their victims with about the same sense of concern that we feel when we carve a turkey for Thanksgiving dinner."
Is that referring to Eric, or is it a general statement about criminal psychopaths?

The way I read it, what you posted is a quote written by Dave Cullen with Robert Hare's statement attached to make it sound as though he was referring specifically to Eric Harris. If you look at the quotes in that article, it seems to me that Hare was talking about psychopathy in general and Cullen weaved them into the article to make it sound as though he was referring to a particular individual. Maybe I'm wrong about it but I don't see him say anything that is specific to Eric, the quotes are suspiciously short or without context, and with the addition of a disclaimer on Hare's website, I don't get the impression that Hare has any professional opinion on the diagnosis of Eric Harris. That's not to say he would disagree if he did personally evaluate Eric, but he makes a point to say that he has not been directly involved in the psychological assessment of Eric or Dylan (which is curious, considering that Cullen's article said that he was consulted by the FBI regarding Columbine, which would probably suggest to readers that he was personally involved with the assessments, if they had not accessed the page through Hare's website).

LPorter101 wrote:

Here is my comment:

You are indeed correct that Dave Cullen's book is full of inaccurate and misleading information. Unfortunately, you take the ball and run with it in the wrong direction, focusing on the tired issue of antidepressants.

The main problem with Mr. Cullen's book is that his characterization of Eric Harris as a swaggering, confident ladies' man and Dylan Klebold as his cowering emo lapdog is so thoroughly at variance with the established, known facts of the two boys' lives that one wonders how a reasonably intelligent (and honest) person who spent ten years looking at the available evidence could have come to such a conclusion.

I could write a book debunking Cullenbine, but for now I'll make these points:

You should write that book. It'll sell if you publicly collaborate with Jenn and Sorority.

sscc wrote:

lasttrain wrote:

sscc wrote:

lasttrain wrote:

The diagnosis was ultimately endorsed by Dr. Robert Hare, who invented the category of psychopath.

I once asked you to show me where you found this information but you never responded. I can find no evidence online that it's true.

It's here on his personal site:

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

I know Cullen's article is is there but as I pointed out before, it says this.

"The following links are provided, without comment, to illustrate the coverage given to the topic of psychopathy in the media, and are strictly for interest sake."
"*NOTE: Some of Dr. Hare's work was used by the investigators and the writer but Dr. Hare was not directly involved in the psychological assessments."

There is no endorsement and he puts a special note on this article to make readers aware that he was not directly involved in the assessment. I think saying that he endorses the diagnosis is a misrepresentation of what is there.

He would not link to a finding that was a misuse of his work. He is only clarifying that he didn't produce it.