Dave Cullen and Dylan Klebold

I know I already made a huge post about why Dave Cullen is dead wrong and I know everyone here already knows that, but it just pisses me off so much. The fact that he can write all these things that ANYONE who actually studies the documents can see is wrong, and the whole fucking public just eats it up... I just want to do something about it... somehow write a more truthful book that's just as successful?  

Anyway, I was reading this: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and I was shocked. I thought I covered all of Cullen's weird assumptions about Dylan in my first post, but no! Cullen writes that Dylan believed in God with NO DOUBT, and he believed in a literal heaven and hell. What??!?! Correct me if I am wrong, but the ONLY time Dylan mentions God in his journal is when he says something along the lines of "Why are you doing this to me god (or whoever is the being that runs shit)". Something like that. How is that believing in God with NO DOUBT?!?! And yes I KNOW Dylan mentions some form of afterlife, but Dave says he believed in a literal heaven and hell. WHERE DOES HE SAY THAT? Dave also writes that Dylan talked about the afterlife consequences in their final message. When? All he even says is that he's going to a better place.... He's not even sure where that is. And he also says Dylan would pretend to look cool in the videos and then look to Eric for approval... THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, YOU CAN'T WRITE THAT AS FACT! You don't KNOW that was the case, that is an interpretation!!! My god... plus doesn't Dylan laugh at Eric when he tries to light a cigarette? He also mentions that Dylan was wavering and losing his nerve during the start of the massacre. HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW THAT???? Sorry, this just makes me so angry. If I am wrong on any of this, please tell me, but I have no idea how Dave is making these conclusions. He seems to just assume things a lot. For example, although Eric says he lies to keep his ass out of the water and hates liars, Dave says that he is REALLY lying for pleasure and that is part of why he is a psychopath. How does he know that? God dammit. I am infuriated that people actually just read his book and accept it as true when there are all these glaring errors. Not to mention he doesn't talk about the library, and he conveniently skips over any moment where Dylan is vicious (Lance Kirklin).

What do you guys think?

Evan Todd reported that Dylan told Valeen Schnurr that "God is gay" in the library. Sounds like he believes to me.

MarmaladeSkies wrote:

Evan Todd reported that Dylan told Valeen Schnurr that "God is gay" in the library. Sounds like he believes to me.

That's possible, or it could have been Dylan rejecting that belief after Valeen said she did believe in God. It still is weird that Cullen insists that he was a believer in God and heaven and hell without question when there is hardly any evidence to support that. I mean, he ranted with Eric about hating "Christian, godly little whores". Also, Dave claims he references the consequences of killing people when it comes to heaven and hell in the last video message. He does not.

I think that Dylan did believe in some form of afterlife/spiritual force/etc, but that doesn't mean that he adhered to the monotheistic ideas of God and the afterlife at all. I think he didn't have a set outline of whatever was out there for him or a set image of 'whoever' ran the show.. I think he may have hoped for some things or formed tentative opinions on matters in the spiritual, but I can't form a definite statement on this without having spoken with Dylan himself. (The things I would give to be able to have that conversation!) What is rather interesting to me is the concept of the halcyon he also mentioned, which stems from classical legends about kingfisher birds nesting on/near the sea with the storm deity calming the waters for them. (The term halcyon days is derived from these stories as well.) The way Dylan speaks of the halcyon and any other remotely spiritual mention has me thinking that tales like these say a lot more about what he longed for and hoped to find in his next life than the monotheistic approach to things does. Dylan strikes me far more as an Eastern philosophy type of guy somehow.

The thing I don't like about Dave is that he presents his opinions and speculations as factual throughout his book. I have formed my own tentative opinions on the case, the boys, etc.. and I don't often see eye-to-eye with him on anything. I always state that "I think/believe/feel" when I speak about these things, but Dave just says "here are the facts". Either Dave has a time machine, or he's pulling most of it out of his ass. There is not enough evidence to be sure on much of anything. (Dave defends and smooths over Dylan's rough patches so much that I often take the other side and speak of Dylan less 'highly' than I usually would. And, honestly, I do think Eric's a little smartass punk I wish to kick in the teeth most days but Dave has me roaring mama bear over that kid like crazy. He's accomplishing the exact opposite of what he wants me to feel/think with that book of his.)

They will never learn, or maybe they will, but wont have the strength to learn. to be aware is not a trait, its a godlike thing.  Blessed God. Not a christian, jesus, mt. sanai, Abraham, David, bible gay shit god, but a true controller of existence.  (FATE symbol) has to make us this way.

In a struggling, warped sense, Dylan is saying: I am God.  I am empowered. I control my own fate and destiny.  The zombies will never learn as they're being controlled.

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

Dylan seemed to have his own set of spiritual values but he was not religious in the traditional sense. If anything, he was turned off by religion and it's dogma most probably because of the snooty, proselytizing Xtian community that was all around him in Littleton.  The richy riches and godly xtians were crawling within Columbine HS and he probably felt that religion was nothing more that a representation of mindless, controlling, zombie based authority.

In some ways, to me, Dylan seemed a bit of a hippy in his values of what he envisions that life should be like, but was painfully not for him in this particular (lifetime) existence. (Heavily alluding in his steadfast belief in reincarnation.)  Perhaps, this is why he gravitated towards writing a report on Charles Manson and his Family.  The connection of The Family, and the sort of 'utopia' it symbolized: the unconditional love and the loyality, to the point of blindness, may have appealed to him.   Being in a state of love, bliss and happiness, loving yourself and loving your soulmate and nothing else matters.  To Dylan, life should (have been) effortlessly flowing, perfect and happy.

Self-awareness.....
Infinince.....
Existence.....
Knowledge.....
Neutrality.....
Possibility of Happiness.....
Understanding of the everything.....

Love is more valuable than anything I know. To love is to enter a completion of one's self. I hate those who choose to destroy a love, who take it for granted. love is greater than life even..

 The framework of society stands above & below me. The hardest thing to destroy, yet the weakest thing that exists. I know that i am different, yet i am afraid to tell the society. The possible abandonment, persecution is not something I want to face, yet it is so primitive to me. I guess being yourself means letting people know about inner thoughts too, not just opinions & fashions. (Heheh) I will be free one day, in the land of purity & my happiness, I will have a love, someone who is me in a way. Someday... Possibly thru this life, maybe another, but it will happen...

When Dylan said "god is gay" he is dissing the establishment's version of "god".  What everyone at his school buys into.  Valeen gropes around for the "right" answer...she believes because her family brought her up to believe.  Case in point.  It is the mindlessness that Dylan mocks and challenges on that day.

thedragonrampant wrote:

I always state that "I think/believe/feel" when I speak about these things, but Dave just says "here are the facts". Either Dave has a time machine, or he's pulling most of it out of his ass.


I do think Eric's a little smartass punk I wish to kick in the teeth most days but Dave has me roaring mama bear over that kid like crazy.

Amen.

We know Cullen is an idiot, so I sold my book ebay. Cullens book is too much fiction. He interpreted all thing like he wants. So he interpreted that Dylan believed in god.

Today I got "Far from the tree." And i would love to read a book written from his parents or a near friend. Brooks No easy answer was not bad, but not too much insight.

em81 wrote:

Brooks No easy answer was not bad, but not too much insight.

There's not much insight because the guy had no insight, he was blindsided like everyone else.

He gets a lot of shit and he deserves most, if not all of it, but I do pity the guy. Dylan was one of his best friends, I can only imagine how he felt.

He had not much insight because he was not dylans best friend in the last years, only if they were kids, i believe.

he is not the only one who got a lot of shit, i saw the obliterated names and saw the dob. So i know these names were robert perry and chris morris. stupid police.

sorry for offtopic  

[quote="areyoulistening"]

em81 wrote:

He gets a lot of shit and he deserves most, if not all of it, but I do pity the guy. Dylan was one of his best friends, I can only imagine how he felt.

Why do you say he deserves the shit he gets? I didn't even know he got a lot of shit. What has Brooks done wrong?

On the whole subject of Dylan, everything you guys are saying is correct. I knew when I posted this that Dylan had ideas of an afterlife and HIM being a God among sheep. It's just that Dave wrote that he was a believer in God with no question (when in fact he thought HE was the God) and that he "believed in a literal heaven and hell" and that he discussed the hellish consequences of his killing in the final video message. That is just an outright lie.

Do you guys even know where Dave is getting the whole "Dylan was wavering/losing his nerve during the massacre" thing?

highwayhypnosis wrote:

On the whole subject of Dylan, everything you guys are saying is correct. I knew when I posted this that Dylan had ideas of an afterlife and HIM being a God among sheep. It's just that Dave wrote that he was a believer in God with no question (when in fact he thought HE was the God) and that he "believed in a literal heaven and hell" and that he discussed the hellish consequences of his killing in the final video message. That is just an outright lie.

Yep. You're preaching to the choir where Dave Cullen is concerned. ;) The guy has drawn his own brand of conclusions and anyone that really looks into Columbine, in detail, will see that it doesn't match up. Dave declared that Dylan clung to god throughout his entire fictionalized non-fiction (heh) but just because he said as such doesn't make it so. I agree with your statement that Dylan was not a believer in god, in the traditional religious sense, and that Cullen is off the mark. Not sure what answer you're looking for - there simply is none!

highwayhypnosis wrote:

areyoulistening wrote:

em81 wrote:

He gets a lot of shit and he deserves most, if not all of it, but I do pity the guy. Dylan was one of his best friends, I can only imagine how he felt.

Why do you say he deserves the shit he gets? I didn't even know he got a lot of shit. What has Brooks done wrong?

Woah boy. That's a can of worms.. Especially if you're on Tumblr.  

I did not write that he deserve it. That was "areyoulistening". Think Brooks is a nice guy, but i don´t like his parents.

InFiNiNcEX5 wrote:

highwayhypnosis wrote:

On the whole subject of Dylan, everything you guys are saying is correct. I knew when I posted this that Dylan had ideas of an afterlife and HIM being a God among sheep. It's just that Dave wrote that he was a believer in God with no question (when in fact he thought HE was the God) and that he "believed in a literal heaven and hell" and that he discussed the hellish consequences of his killing in the final video message. That is just an outright lie.

Yep. You're preaching to the choir where Dave Cullen is concerned.  ;)   The guy has drawn his own brand of conclusions and anyone that really looks into Columbine, in detail, will see that it doesn't match up.  Dave declared that Dylan clung to god throughout his entire fictionalized non-fiction (heh) but just because he said as such doesn't make it so.  I agree with your statement that Dylan was not a believer in god, in the traditional religious sense, and that Cullen is off the mark.  Not sure what answer you're looking for - there simply is none!

You're right, there is no answer. I guess this just makes me mad. I've said before that I wish there could be something done to discredit his book in the public eye, because it's just so damn wrong but the book's success has caused everyone to accept it as fact. I think that's very wrong, as I am always a fan of the truth.

InFiNiNcEX5 wrote:

highwayhypnosis wrote:

areyoulistening wrote:

em81 wrote:

He gets a lot of shit and he deserves most, if not all of it, but I do pity the guy. Dylan was one of his best friends, I can only imagine how he felt.

Why do you say he deserves the shit he gets? I didn't even know he got a lot of shit. What has Brooks done wrong?

Woah boy.  That's a can of worms.. Especially if you're on Tumblr.  

I really don't mean to be annoying, but can you try to explain it briefly? I don't think the guy has done anything wrong, I thought people who researched Columbine tend to respect him and his book. What did he do?

In that article, it says:

Quote :

The lunch crowd had panicked. Most took cover under tables; some ran for the stairs. About 100 were caught on the staircase, racing for cover on the second floor. Dylan took a few steps and lifted his weapon to firing position. For the second time, he appeared to lose his nerve. He swept his rifle in an arc across the room. He watched the students disappear up the stairs. He did not fire.

Since when did Dylan have a rifle?

highwayhypnosis wrote:

Do you guys even know where Dave is getting the whole "Dylan was wavering/losing his nerve during the massacre" thing?

Honestly, I think that's just another side-effect of the overarching theory that Dylan was a depressive follower who looked to Eric for approval/directions on anything. It irks me that Dave describes Dylan's 'interaction' with Lance Kirklin outside as "the gunman said", because that phrasing gives off the impression that it could've been Eric especially because he spends the surrounding paragraphs on Eric's gunmanship outside of the school. Dave doesn't spend any time with the boys in the library other than a second-hand description of what it all sounded like from the room Dave Sanders was staying in, so it's not like he had to describe how "woohoo!" Dylan was at the chance of killing/injuring people. That makes the whole "Dylan was wavering and didn't fire off that many shots outside" and "Dylan lost his nerve when he walked into that cafeteria on his own" a little easier to force down people's throats. There are a lot of things I don't quite understand in their respective reasonings/actions from that day, but never have I thought that Dylan wavered or lost his nerve throughout the experience. The way Dylan behaved that day does not add up to the theory that Eric was the one holding his leash, and even their interactions on the tapes we have (and do not have) suggest there was no real leader of the pack. Did they help each other build up their rage and hatred and homicidal/suicidal ideations? You bet. Was one of them a psychopathic leader leading the meek depressed lamb to slaughter? That's what the FBI and Dave Cullen would have you believe. And, how better to 'sell' that overarching theory than include the follower's belief in God and an afterlife? Readers would be able to relate to that lovely kid doing his best to adhere to his spiritual convictions trying to become 'the better man', even though he was really depressed and willing to kill himself to go on to a better existence. Then the narrative would go on to include that pesky convincing toerag of an Eric who talked that same kid into sweeping the devil's floors with murder and mayhem instead. It's not that difficult to have Dylan come across as the more likeable of the two, even though he's the one who pulled the wool over everybody's eyes in the process. Dave paints a picture that is very believable for a first-time reader with no prior knowledge of the case.

Brooks's book reads a lot better to me overall in comparison, although I'm quite sure that there are some embellishments and different interpretations in that account of things as well. I'm still working my way through it, but I really like the account of what they were like as children and how things changed when they got to Columbine. Brooks, too, attributes a lot more blame to Eric than Dylan for how things played out.. understandable given the fact that Dylan was his childhood friend and given the fact that Brooks fought with Eric for quite some time.. but it does read very differently because Brooks doesn't go out of his way to make the reader believe everything he says. In fact, he admits to some of his own faults and flaws quite readily throughout the narrative and gives off the impression that he himself is still looking for some of the answers. As a fellow punctual person who gets really freaked out about being late, it is not hard for me to see why Eric was so thoroughly pissed off at the kid for never being on time.  The whole thing reads to me as so juvenile/childish, including that manipulative insincere apology to Brooks's mom and them not being on speaking terms for ages. What I really liked was how Brooks does describe that he was given Eric's website address by Dylan, but that he also admits that he doesn't know why Dylan gave it to him. Dave would've spun an elaborate explanation of it that he'd present as fact, but Brooks comes straight out with at least three possibilities why and no real conviction on any of them. In my opinion, it's stuff like this that makes No Easy Answers the better reading option concerning the case.

Cullens book is more fiction, Brooks wrote about what he know and remeber. That is the difference.

highwayhypnosis wrote:

I know I already made a huge post about why Dave Cullen is dead wrong and I know everyone here already knows that, but it just pisses me off so much. The fact that he can write all these things that ANYONE who actually studies the documents can see is wrong, and the whole fucking public just eats it up... I just want to do something about it... somehow write a more truthful book that's just as successful?  

Anyway, I was reading this: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and I was shocked. I thought I covered all of Cullen's weird assumptions about Dylan in my first post, but no! Cullen writes that Dylan believed in God with NO DOUBT, and he believed in a literal heaven and hell. What??!?! Correct me if I am wrong, but the ONLY time Dylan mentions God in his journal is when he says something along the lines of "Why are you doing this to me god (or whoever is the being that runs shit)". Something like that. How is that believing in God with NO DOUBT?!?! And yes I KNOW Dylan mentions some form of afterlife, but Dave says he believed in a literal heaven and hell. WHERE DOES HE SAY THAT? Dave also writes that Dylan talked about the afterlife consequences in their final message. When? All he even says is that he's going to a better place.... He's not even sure where that is. And he also says Dylan would pretend to look cool in the videos and then look to Eric for approval... THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, YOU CAN'T WRITE THAT AS FACT! You don't KNOW that was the case, that is an interpretation!!! My god... plus doesn't Dylan laugh at Eric when he tries to light a cigarette? He also mentions that Dylan was wavering and losing his nerve during the start of the massacre. HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW THAT???? Sorry, this just makes me so angry. If I am wrong on any of this, please tell me, but I have no idea how Dave is making these conclusions. He seems to just assume things a lot. For example, although Eric says he lies to keep his ass out of the water and hates liars, Dave says that he is REALLY lying for pleasure and that is part of why he is a psychopath. How does he know that? God dammit. I am infuriated that people actually just read his book and accept it as true when there are all these glaring errors. Not to mention he doesn't talk about the library, and he conveniently skips over any moment where Dylan is vicious (Lance Kirklin).

What do you guys think?

I remember when I was reading Cullen's book and I had very frequent questions about how he knew certain details, especially those pertaining to the moment of the shooting. It's a shame that he writes about his personal theory in such a way that demands readers (especially the impressionable ones) to believe that it is the only truth. People like solid conclusions like that. Cullen is silly enough to think he has the meaning and reasoning of it all, and it's a shame that he has such a following that can't be okay with not knowing exactly why Columbine happened. He gave people an easy scapegoat and a convenient judgment to keep in their pocket for when they think of Columbine. Just like Brooks says, there's no such thing as an easy answer for it all. Columbine and what led up to it was not a movie that some screenwriter put together to make you go "Aha!" at the end. It was a real event muddled with the complexities of a dynamic and multi-faceted existence. Sure, hindsight can tell us a lot, but sometimes the past is actually more mosaic than the way it is seen from a distance when our vision blurs and we lose sight of the details.

We all know that, though, which is why you'll notice that this forum doesn't focus on the question, "Why?"

highwayhypnosis wrote:

Anyway, I was reading this: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and I was shocked. I thought I covered all of Cullen's weird assumptions about Dylan in my first post, but no! Cullen writes that Dylan believed in God with NO DOUBT, and he believed in a literal heaven and hell. What??!?!

Cullen is basing this on his writings. Dylan refers to God on pages 9, 15, and 40 of his journals. among other places (acolumbinesite.com pagination). Heaven and hell stuff is 6. He constantly refers to spirituality, the afterlife, existence, etc.

highwayhypnosis wrote:

Do you guys even know where Dave is getting the whole "Dylan was wavering/losing his nerve during the massacre" thing?

Well, at the beginning Dylan didn't do nearly as much as Eric. Harris shot at a dramatically higher rate. 47-5 according to ballistics. Klebold passed up a chance to shoot huge numbers of people in the cafeteria. He fled from Gardner.

One was also reported by one credible witness to have reported, "We're still doing this right?" And it is impossible to believe that Dylan would have asked this of Eric, given what Eric had already done.

sorry wrong place

Maybe ..... Just maybe.... Dave was the 3rd shooter :O
That's how he knows all of this
-Plays The Twilight Zone Music-

That would explain all the witness statements about the third shooter

highwayhypnosis wrote:

Cullen writes that Dylan believed in God with NO DOUBT, and he believed in a literal heaven and hell. What??!?! Correct me if I am wrong, but the ONLY time Dylan mentions God in his journal is when he says something along the lines of "Why are you doing this to me god (or whoever is the being that runs shit)". Something like that. How is that believing in God with NO DOUBT?!?!

Dylan mentions 'God,' 'Heaven' and 'Hell' a couple of times in his journal but nothing that would explicitly state this was his belief system. I understand his entries are very open to personal interpretation however I can't understand how Cullen could come up with such a definite claim, especially as mentioned by others in this thread there is not a great deal of evidence that would support this.

Dylan's journal entries that mention God, Heaven and Hell  include:

“(god I guess, whoever is the being which controls shit). He’s fucking me over big time” pg(26390)
“God. Lucifer.Heaven.Hell.” He mentions “GOOD.BAD” and “the ‘fight’ between good and evil.” and “I am GOD” pg(26393)
“me is a god, a god of sadness exiled to this eternal hell” pg(26397)
“Some god I am” pg(26400)
“the gods are deceiving,” “The god of sadness…. REDACTED church was so fun…the rec thing” pg(26401)
“Only for the gods,” “Existence is pure hell and pure heaven at the same time.” Pg(26404)
"Almost happiness is slavery – to be real, people (gods) are slaves to the majority of zombies,” “I am GOD, REDACTED is GOD” pg(26405)
“I am a true god,” “the one thing that made me a god” pg(26412)
“I am the god of everything” pg(26413)
“Blessed God, not a Christian, Jesus, Mt.Sinai, Abraham, David, Bible gay shit god,” pg(26484)
“just to be together would have been pure heaven” pg(26408)
I took most of these quotes from Peter Langmans transcrips:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
They are much easier than trying to read Dylan's handwriting and are great to cross reference with the original copies.

In Eric's yearbook Dylan writes: “we, the gods, will have so much fun with NBK!!” pg(26237) and “They will know when gods get pissed off” pg(26241)
If anything based purely on these entries it seems Dylan perceived himself as some kind of God.
There are also several references to ‘godlike’ and ‘godliness’ and where Dylan uses the word ‘God’ in a different context such as “god I HATE my life.” Pg(26390)

highwayhypnosis wrote:

And yes I KNOW Dylan mentions some form of afterlife, but Dave says he believed in a literal heaven and hell. WHERE DOES HE SAY THAT? Dave also writes that Dylan talked about the afterlife consequences in their final message. When? All he even says is that he's going to a better place.... He's not even sure where that is.

You're right, in the final tape Dylan says: "I didn't like life too much and i know i'll be happier wherever the fuck i go." pg(10376)
There is no specific reference to the afterlife other than the fact Dylan mentions going "somewhere." I would presume Cullen could have interpreted this as if Dylan thought he would go "somewhere" after his life then this demonstrates without a doubt that he believed in an afterlife.

highwayhypnosis wrote:

And he also says Dylan would pretend to look cool in the videos and then look to Eric for approval... THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, YOU CAN'T WRITE THAT AS FACT! You don't KNOW that was the case, that is an interpretation!!! My god... plus doesn't Dylan laugh at Eric when he tries to light a cigarette?

I tried to consider this point from Cullens perspective, if he genueienly believed Dylan was an innocent follower then perhaps he thought all the swearing and violent language Dylan used throughout these tapes was an act and was used in order to look cool to the audience and in front of Eric.
The Dylan / Eric and the cigarette moment is at the end of the Radioactive Clothing video and to me it does look like Dylan is trying to to laugh at Eric.  

highwayhypnosis wrote:

He also mentions that Dylan was wavering and losing his nerve during the start of the massacre. HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW THAT???? Sorry, this just makes me so angry. If I am wrong on any of this, please tell me, but I have no idea how Dave is making these conclusions.

As lasttrain mentions according to ballistics Eric does fire more shots outside in comparisson to Dylan, 47-5 is a significant difference.
On pg(48) of his book Cullen describes Dylan entering the cafeteria and losing his nerve because he did not fire. I'm not saying this is my belief but it certainly could be argued that Dylan was merely checking on the cafeteria bombs to ensure they were still there or if they had exploded / why they hadn't. Perhaps he did not want to get "jumped" as he was alone and decided not to fire his weapon because of this.
I'd be interested to hear how nervous and wavering he was in Cullen's opinion when he fired his weapon at students outside the school and had just shot Lance Kirklin at close range.
As also mentioned Cullen has Dylan fleeing into the school on pg(51) of his book. I can see how Cullen may have interpreted Dylan as "wavering" or "losing his nevrve"
at the beginning of the shooting purely based on shots fired, but to me this still seems like an exaggerated assumption made  in order to fit his Dylan. He does not know any of this information for sure and seems to add his own extra little bits and pieces into his story. On pg(46) of his book for example he claims Eric likely sent Dylan down to the cafeteria to "rev up the body count." On the following page he also claims Dylan pretended to fall for Sean Graves playing dead outside.
It was Lisa Kruetz who "remembers hearing one of the gunmen say to the other one, "Are you still with me?" and "We're still gonna do this, right?" pg(62) This exchange occurred according to her statement after she heard two people coming into the library.

highwayhypnosis wrote:

For example, although Eric says he lies to keep his ass out of the water and hates liars, Dave says that he is REALLY lying for pleasure and that is part of why he is a psychopath. How does he know that?

There's some interesting conversation about the psychopath claim here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

em81 wrote:

We know Cullen is an idiot, so I sold my book ebay.

This made me laugh

em81 wrote:

I did not write that he deserve it. That was "areyoulistening". Think Brooks is a nice guy, but i don´t like his parents.

Without derailing the topic too much I'm interested to know why you don't like his parents?

thedragonrampant wrote:

It irks me that Dave describes Dylan's 'interaction' with Lance Kirklin outside as "the gunman said", because that phrasing gives off the impression that it could've been Eric especially because he spends the surrounding paragraphs on Eric's gunmanship outside of the school. Dave doesn't spend any time with the boys in the library other than a second-hand description of what it all sounded like from the room Dave Sanders was staying in, so it's not like he had to describe how "woohoo!"

I also found these parts very frustrating. He seems to gloss over Dylan shooting Lance Kirklin. There is plenty of evidence he could have used to describe what happened in the library yet he chose not to use this, possibly because again it did not portray his Dylan.  

fatlittleparasite wrote:

It's a shame that he writes about his personal theory in such a way that demands readers (especially the impressionable ones) to believe that it is the only truth.

Great post. I try to look at the shooting from Cullen's perspective and i also try to understand how or why he comes to the conclusions he does but he makes it extremely difficult. He is very unclear between what information he used is based on evidence and what is his own opinion. What I find equally frustrating is that he does appear in parts to reference the original Columbine documents (11k) but then fails dramatically in other areas where he does not. I always felt like Cullen gives the impression that he has had access to the basement tapes and other unseen information. I just feel like there are so many vital errors in his writings that many are hard to excuse.

I know why Cullen described Dylan as a follower. Now I read 11 k again and there are many witness statements that Dylan was "a follower". One student said if Harris and Morris did something, Klebold would follow. And another student said she thought Dylan wanted to impress Eric. So I know where it comes. Maybe there is something true, but that doesn´t mean that Dylan didn´t want NBK and was only a depressed, innocent guy.

em81 wrote:

I know why Cullen described Dylan as a follower. Now I read 11 k again and there are many witness statements that Dylan was "a follower". One student said if Harris and Morris did something, Klebold would follow. And another student said she thought Dylan wanted to impress Eric. So I know where it comes. Maybe there is something true, but that doesn´t mean that Dylan didn´t want NBK and was only a depressed, innocent guy.  

In my reading of the 11K, I also get that the overall impression of Dylan as viewed by his classmates is that of a follower.  They also said Dylan seemed, nice and quiet and gentle.  Some that knew him and others that were acquaintances.  Those classmate opinions can't really be disregarded.  Imo, they are the most valid accounts. They were there; we weren't.  They saw him interacting with his friends. They should have a pretty good overall idea of what Dylan was like in real life.  But yes, he was viewed a follower by quite a few - so, in that regard, I could see how Cullen ran with the "follower" thing. The problem is, Cullen continued to use it in a way that didn't entirely connect with the facts.  It became his own biased, opinionated version of Dylan - of both boys for that matter.  He was trying to take a round peg and make it fit a square hole and the embellished, simplified versions of their personalities did not fit in with the facts given.   Brooks Brown and others just laughed and rolled their eyes when they read Cullen's book.  They could see where all the fabrication was standing out like a sore thumb against the actual reality.

In response to lasttrain and queenfarooq comments, Dylan does appear to be the weaker of the two at the beginning of NBK.  When Dylan is in close proximity to Eric, he is shooting, yes, but he wasn't shooting very accurately. Hell, he's not even using the best gun for accuracy.   I think I mentioned this in another post but he's chosen the double barrel simply because it's romantic and 'straight out of Desperado.'   And as lasttrain succintly put it, the ballistics clearly show that of the two, Eric fired more shots at the beginning of NBK while they were outside.    Dylan was messing around, trying the killing thing on for size with inaccurate distance shooting and throwing many, asundry bombs in the parking lot.     He was getting his feet wet slooowly.  By contrast, Eric hit the ground running, trigger happy as can be and accurate to boot.   Yet, when Dylan goes off by himself, inside the cafeteria, where he is not in Eric's presence, he doesn't even attempt to shoot and kill anyone.  He had free range of the cafeteria.  Was he just checking on the bombs?  Yes, certainly, that makes good sense.  But why not kill more people?   It could've been a virtual shooting gallery for him.  Shooting in the cafeteria or running up the stairs and finding targets.  I mean this is "revenge on the commons" right?  But see, Eric wasn't in the cafeteria with him so Dylan does not have to impress his friend.  I'm wondering if Lance Kirklin was laying there in plain sight for Eric to see Dylan shoot him in the face.  Is this the case?  

Even in the hallway when they're making their way over to the library, Dylan doesn't kill anyone.  He shot the lockers, he shot the trophy case. Didn't he shoot a girl's ankle?  Wowee.  But Eric shot Mr. Sanders a few times in the jaw.  Doesn't Dylan run down by the top of the staircase where Mr. Sanders is laying on the ground?  Does Dylan shoot him again?  Nope.  He leaves him.  Now, in the library, Eric is close by Dylan, so Dylan has to put on a big show to impress his friend.   It would makes the most sense to me if Eric is the one that asked Dylan "are you still with me?  We're still going to do this, right?" Why would it be the other way around?  What would allude that Eric was vacillating and needed to be asked that question?  Eric was going gung ho with his weapons all along - that is, up until his gun recoil broke his nose (and hey, that was the BEST thing that could ever have happened to take him down a peg and throw a bucket of cold water on his lust for killing.)   Dylan changes when they hit the library, he becomes a killing maniac. Why?  Because Eric is in very close proximity. Dylan shoots and kills someone first. An easy target, a special ed kid who isn't even hiding.  An easy kill and easy way to gain approval from his friend.  Now more than ever, he has to prove that he is enjoying this as much as Eric is. Being loud may have been a distraction, a way of saying: "look how IN to this I am, woohoo!"  Afterward, when they go back down into the cafeteria, both of them have petered out on the killing.  Witnesses that were stuck in the cafeteria closet said that E & D were talking outside the door, attempted to pry it open a couple of times, yet the two never even shot the door.  And what about the instance where Dylan is alone and runs into Tim Castle up in the ceiling.  Again, Dylan refrains from killing. When Dylan is by himself, Dylan does not seem to be putting on the Natural Born Killer show.  Yet, when Dylan is with Eric, he morphs into a wild maniac to impress his friend.  *shrugs* It's a theory.  And of course, none of this absolves or excuses Dylan's behavior nor elevates him as better than Eric.  It simply shows that Dylan's motivations while in the midst of NBK were likely not the same as Eric's.

queenfarooq wrote:

I always felt like Cullen gives the impression that he has had access to the basement tapes and other unseen information. I just feel like there are so many vital errors in his writings that many are hard to excuse.

Wow... I am so glad I'm not the only one to have been struck with that impression. When I read Cullen's book, I had done most of my research through acolumbinesite just gathering the facts and looking at evidence. I knew that the basement tapes existed, but I don't think I had grasped the fact that there was such a huge controversy over them being released. I was still at the relative beginning of my Columbine research journey. So, I read the book. I eventually got interested in visiting these forums and reading more books (I'm ashamed to say that I think his was the first Columbine book I've finished), and then I started wondering why I had such a vague recollection of what was on the tapes if they were locked away into oblivion. I really think it was his book that makes me feel like I have seen the tapes before. I've talked to someone else about this during one of Reddit's AMA interviews (I can't help but gag every time people start touting Cullen's Bible in the commens) and they also had a sense that they'd seen at least part of the tapes. We both agreed that it must have been all the reading working with our imaginations to make us think we've seen more than we have. I wonder if that person has read Cullen's book.

Cullen's book is really puffed up with imagery and false authority. He would do better in a writing field that would allow him to safely parade his talent for painting a vivid scene and asserting details--like fiction.