A somewhat strange passage in Sue's book.

I have always been interested in the Paranormal, as a small child I heard countless stories from family members about weird/strange things happening to them, or to other family members that couldn't be explained. It's a well known fact that my family seems to attract things of this nature. I myself have had several occurrences happen to me that were inexplicable unless you believe in the paranormal. Things that were witnessed by other people outside my immediate family, who still to this day try to explain away what happened and simply cant.

I am a firm believer that buildings/places can be imprinted by a past event. High emotions, especially ones of a tragedy such as Columbine would leave traces that the right type of sensitive person would/could pick up. I don't like to use the word haunted, which usually brings to mind groaning, white sheet ghosts and clanking chains. I mean something that truly cannot be debunked, cannot be reasoned away.

A small passage in Sue's book intrigues me. On page 107 she is talking about when they got to enter the library for the first time to see the crime scene. She wrote,

" I was trembling when we entered. Always looking for answers, I wanted to believe that seeing where Dylan and the others had died would provide me with a revelation, some insight. I hoped I would walk into the room and understand something vital about the events of that day, and about Dylan's state of mind, and I tried to set my sorrow aside so I could receive any truth occupying the space.

The moment I walked into the room, everything fell silent. I could no longer hear the repairs being made in the hallway. I sensed only two things before I was overtaken by tears. I felt the presence of children, and I felt peace."  

Seems strange to me that peace would be something she would feel when faced with a room full of the staggering evidence of her son's killing spree, the blood soaked carpet, the gore etc. The smell alone would have been horrific, not to mention seeing his outline on the carpet where he had taken his own life.  I wonder if the peace she picked up on was of Dylan finally being at peace himself?

When they first opened the Chambers street subway in NYC after 9/11 I remember how quiet everything was when pulling into the station. There wasn't a lot of talking or noise, it was peaceful. She may have been feeling that eerie quiet feeling.

I don't think she knew about even the journals at that point? She was still thinking that Dylan was someone who got caught up in Eric's plan. She thought of everyone's souls resting comfortably maybe?

Maybe she had come to peace with his death. Up until a certain point Sue had not wanted to believe Dylan was involved. Perhaps seeing his blood stain on the floor as well as the blood from what he had done, gave her the peace she needed to come to terms with what had happened.

Personally, as much as I'd like to believe that Dylan was at peace when he died, I just am not sure he is. I don't know what happens after we die so I can't say one way or another but there is a part of me that thinks he is not.

Lizpuff wrote:

Maybe she had come to peace with his death.  Up until a certain point Sue had not wanted to believe Dylan was involved.  Perhaps seeing his blood stain on the floor as well as the blood from what he had done, gave her the peace she needed to come to terms with what had happened.

Based on Sue's book, they got to view the library in early June of 99. She didn't say a specific day. Still a few weeks seems to me a bit soon for a mother to have found any type of peace with anything concerning her son's suicide, much less the murders he committed beforehand. One would assume that seeing her son's bloody outlined image and that of the others who died that day would have been far from a peaceful experience.

In my opinion, that would be something that a person would never truly find peace with. You would just find away to exist day to day. Sue's wording it the way she did just struck me as odd.

Lizpuff wrote:

Personally, as much as I'd like to believe that Dylan was at peace when he died, I just am not sure he is.  I don't know what happens after we die so I can't say one way or another but there is a part of me that thinks he is not.

I am torn between hoping that Dylan did indeed find the peace he so desperately sought, while part of me feels that he doesn't deserve to be at peace. I am sympathetic to a degree, knowing that he was suffering from a wide assortment of mental issues. If he had just committed suicide, then I could easily say that I hope and pray he is at peace. Yet he chose to play God and took innocent lives, and ruined so many others.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

Personally, as much as I'd like to believe that Dylan was at peace when he died, I just am not sure he is.  I don't know what happens after we die so I can't say one way or another but there is a part of me that thinks he is not.

I am torn between hoping that Dylan did indeed find the peace he so desperately sought, while part of me feels that he doesn't deserve to be at peace. I am sympathetic to a degree, knowing that he was suffering from a wide assortment of mental issues. If he had just committed suicide, then I could easily say that I hope and pray he is at peace. Yet he chose to play God and took innocent lives, and ruined so many others.

I grew up with the teachings that if someone commits suicide, they go to Hell. I no longer believe that but sometimes I wonder. I do think that because he did decide to kill others he wouldn't go to Heaven, but because of his mental issues would that make a difference? I believe in God myself and I do believe that things can be forgiven but Dylan and Eric were both so negative right until the end, I don't know that it was forgiven.

Lizpuff wrote:

I grew up with the teachings that if someone commits suicide, they go to Hell.  I no longer believe that but sometimes I wonder.  I do think that because he did decide to kill others he wouldn't go to Heaven, but because of his mental issues would that make a difference?  I believe in God myself and I do believe that things can be forgiven but Dylan and Eric were both so negative right until the end, I don't know that it was forgiven.

I have never been able to have a conversation about religion that didn't end badly, so I make a point to never talk about it with most people. Although, I will say this. I come from a semi religious background. Meaning that we sometimes attended a Christian church on Sundays when I was very young. Yet Christianity or any religion for that matter, was ever forced on me, and I grew up respecting the idea that everyone was entitled to their own beliefs.  With that being said, I think people should have faith or believe in whatever helps you through this life, and gives you solace or peace of mind.

Some have called me an Atheist because I do not conform to any certain religion. That couldn't be further from the truth. I do believe there is some power or Entity that created this world. I am just not foolish enough to say I understand it or to label it as this or that.

I truly don't believe that any religion has it quite right. I do not feel that any being in the history of mankind on this planet would have understood "The Powers that be" enough to base an entire religion on, much less to kill in the name of that religion.

The concept of Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory is nice to think of.  You know, the good go to Heaven, the evil go to Hell, the somewhat naughty go to Purgatory to stand in the corner to think about what they did for a while...

Once again I am not foolish enough to claim that I know what if anything is waiting on the other side. But I do firmly believe that you do not take what you cannot give back.

Eric and Dylan took their own lives as well as others. Most religious people would say that act would damn them. But no one really knows what happens when you die, you could go to Heaven or Hell, or somewhere in between. Or you could just cease to exist and that's it. The answer to that age old question will never be found, it is just not meant to be known.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Based on Sue's book, they got to view the library in early June of 99. She didn't say a specific day.

Tom & Sue Klebold went to Columbine on June 3 1999 from 1:40 pm to 2:50 pm - page 016201

sororityalpha wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Based on Sue's book, they got to view the library in early June of 99. She didn't say a specific day.

Tom & Sue Klebold went to Columbine on June 3 1999 from 1:40 pm to 2:50 pm - page 016201

Thank you! I was just going from Sue's book, and didn't feel like searching through documents!

I believe everyone who died that day is in peace and in Heaven.
It was very soon after the tragedy so I don't know if SK picked up on that specifically but I hope she did.

Another passage in her book that caught me as odd was on page 21, she wrote,

"Before the burst of activity to follow, I had a short, vivid vision that I was standing with a multitude of spirits, all of whom had suffered. They were all ages, sizes, and races; I couldn't tell who was male and who was female. Their heads were bowed and covered with tattered white robes. My old life had just come to an end, and a new one had begun: a life in which joy, once so abundant, would be simply a memory. Sorrow, I understood with a painful clarity, would transport me though the rest of this life. The vision ended when needles of rain began to fall on my face, like slivers of glass."

The way Sue talks of spirits, visions, and feeling the presence of children when entering the library just have a paranormal feel to them. Also Sue apparently felt strongly enough about these situations to have written them down for the world to read.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

I grew up respecting the idea that everyone was entitled to their own beliefs.  With that being said, I think people should have faith or believe in whatever helps you through this life, and gives you solace or peace of mind.

I agree with you. Everyone has the right to choose what to believe or not to believe. But there is also no "correct" religion, because everyone believes in what he wants to believe. I think that many people are looking for a consolation in religion, not a guide to action or answers to some fundamental questions. However, I treat the religion tolerantly as long as it is not used as a cover for achieving some completely earthly goals (such as power, money, influence, etc.) and is not imposed on people as a single true truth that all must admit.

I believe in the paranormal, I have my own explanations for most of it anyways. My personal opinion in regards to what is happening with Sue is that there are some severe unattended mental issues at hand causing these visions and overwhelming feelings she has.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] just wanted to say that stating "But there is also no "correct" religion" is the same as imposing on people a single true truth. You believe there is no ultimate truth or correct religion but that is not everyones belief. You state it as fact when it is your opinion ;).

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] just wanted to say that stating "But there is also no "correct" religion" is the same as imposing on people a single true truth.  You believe there is no ultimate truth or correct religion but that is not everyones belief.  You state it as fact when it is your opinion ;).

Now I didn't understand at all what you wanted to say. Or you don't understand what I mean ...

Love wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] just wanted to say that stating "But there is also no "correct" religion" is the same as imposing on people a single true truth.  You believe there is no ultimate truth or correct religion but that is not everyones belief.  You state it as fact when it is your opinion ;).

Now I didn't understand at all what you wanted to say. Or you don't understand what I mean ...

I think what he is saying is that by saying that no religions are correct you are telling everyone that believes their religion is correct that they are wrong. Saying that you are right. Imposing that on others as if it were a true fact.

Yeah lizpuff, was just playing devils advocate a bit. I'm done now though, just thought it was ironic.

silentprocess wrote:

Yeah lizpuff, was just playing devils advocate a bit.  I'm done now though, just thought it was ironic.

I agree with you on that statement. Saying everyone is wrong is trying to make a point that you are right.

Lizpuff wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Yeah lizpuff, was just playing devils advocate a bit.  I'm done now though, just thought it was ironic.

I agree with you on that statement.  Saying everyone is wrong is trying to make a point that you are right.  

I was blessed to grow up in a family that never pushed any certain religion down my throat.  I was told that it was for me to decide what I believed in.

So even though I may not agree with someone's religious stance, I would never try to tell them that it was wrong. The main reason being, who truly knows which is right or wrong?  

People get so riled up when anything religious is mentioned. Its a touchy subject for sure. This is why I usually refuse to talk about religion in general!

Lizpuff wrote:

I think what he is saying is that by saying that no religions are correct you are telling everyone that believes their religion is correct that they are wrong.  Saying that you are right.  Imposing that on others as if it were a true fact.

Well, you can understand what you want, but that's not what I meant. I apologize if I suddenly offended your religious feelings...

I'm not offended. While I would consider myself religious, I am probably still a heathen to others. I just thought silentprocess made a good point

Nor am I offended. It's just how you phrased it... I found it ironic and funny, since you did exactly what you don't like others to do.