ABC 20/20 Agrees: Matthew Shepard Murdered During Robbery, Not Hate Crime

ABC 20/20 Agrees: Matthew Shepard Murdered During Robbery, Not Hate Crime The 1998 Matthew Shepard murder, portrayed as a hate crime because Shepard was homosexual, was in fact a bungled burglary and not motivated by hate, according to a new ABC 20/20 investigation, which confirms a MassNews exclusive published at the time. However, ABC did not reveal that this legend was begun by Pinch Sulzberger (using the power of both the New York Times and the Boston Globe which he had just inherited) to begin his plan of imposing homosexual “marriage” across the entire nation, beginning in Massachusetts. According to 20/20, the murder set in motion a drive to promulgate “hate-crime” laws to protect homosexuals from discrimination, with the principal proponent being Sen. Edward Kennedy. ABC has now interviewed the killers, which revealed that the two made a bargain with the court that they would not speak to the media in exchange for an agreement sparing them the death penalty. They are both serving consecutive, double-life sentences. Shepard was a college student beaten to death by McKinney and Henderson in Laramie, Wyoming. MassNews re-ran a summary of their exclusive story last Friday, advising all conservative candidates in the future that they must candidly discuss these issues about homosexuality with the voters or they will never win election or re-election. ABC was timid about going up against Sulzberger’s hoax, saying: “This new information in no way diminishes the importance of the national conversation that took place after Matthew Shepard's murder." Their story is slated to air on Nov. 26.

Pinch Sulzberger Began His “Hate Campaign” against Normal People in 1988

The “Legend of Matthew Shepard” Is Now Part of Our Folklore

This story explains how Pinch Sulzberger began his “Hate Campaign” against normal people in 1988 by using the New York Times and Boston Globe to spread a vicious, false smear against them.

Probably no reader understands how the “Legend of Matthew Shepard” was created out of whole cloth, particularly those in their twenties today.

This recapitulation was published by us on March 11, 2002.

The Propaganda of Matthew Shepard

It wasn’t until the lies about Matthew Shepard surfaced, in an attempt to crush anyone who was not a liberal, that I acquired any interest in homosexuality. Before that, I was as unconcerned as anyone even though we conservatives were being challenged, “big time.”

The lies finally got my attention when the New Bedford Standard Times published a story in October 1998 about, The long, sorry history of Christian bigotry continues unabated.

This aroused my curiosity.

It caused me to research the story of Matthew Shepard. Was the Standard Times accurate in its denunciation of Christian leaders in America? After only a few days of research, it was readily apparent that what the New Bedford paper wrote was a tissue of lies. What had happened to Shepard was a grotesque tragedy, but grotesque tragedies happen to many people every day.

This lie refuses to die because the Boston Globe and its parent, the New York Times, work very hard to keep it alive.

It reappeared again in the Living Arts section of the Globe last Thursday. The front page was almost totally about “folk hero” and “hate crime victim,” Matthew Shepard.

In the next-to-last paragraph of the very long story, the author of an empathetic book about Shepard is quoted, “I still don’t feel I understand what happened that night. I don’t think anybody does. I don’t think [the killers] can really explain to themselves what they did with any absolute certainty.”

And in the last paragraph, a man who produced a play and a drama which will appear on Channel 2 was quoted: “[The author] agrees [with the above quote], but believes that appropriating and simplifying tragedy is a necessity. ‘Anything that becomes devoured by the mass culture in which we live suffers from the process,’ he says. ‘At the same time, it encouraged dialogue on a national level. And that is more important.’”

In other words, “Sure it’s propaganda and not reality. But the lie serves my purpose.”

The Truth

The truth about Matthew Shepard is that he went to a bar and left with two psychopaths who were out to rob him. After they robbed and murdered him, leaving him tied to a fence, they returned to town and attacked two other straight men, hitting one of them with a pistol and opening a wound in his head which required 22 stitches to close. They stopped only when one of the others hit one of them with a stick, giving him a hair-line skull fracture.

Although the killing occurred on the 6th of October, it was not immediately reported by the Boston Globe or its owner, the New York Times.

Meanwhile, on October 8th, an organization known as “People for the American Way” (a brainstorm of Norman Lear who became rich from the Archie Bunker and The Jeffersons TV shows) published a ten-page attack against the major Christian organizations which had started a “Truth in Love” campaign about many homosexuals who had been successful in changing their lifestyles.

The “Truth in Love” campaign was characterized as “hate” by the Lear organization. Its headline was Religious Right’s ‘Lying About Love’ Campaign. This October 8 report from Lear was immediately given by them to the major media and all of Lear’s allies.

As a result, on October 10th, both the Boston Globe and the New York Times suddenly began to report this obscure tragedy from Wyoming.

They reported, as Lear recommended, that the incident was caused by the advertisement which ran across the country earlier in the year which said, We’re standing for the truth that homosexuals can change.

This simple statement by the Christian groups, which was buttressed by the truth that many homosexuals have changed their lives, was said to be “hateful” speech that had brought about a climate which caused those two killers in Wyoming to kill Matthew Shepard. It was because of the “Truth in Love” campaign that Matthew Shepard was murdered.

This was obviously a spin that was preposterous but the mainstream media repeated it over and over and continues to do so until this day.

A few weeks after the murder on October 16, the NY Times reported under the headline, Men Held in Beating Lived on the Fringes, that the two men had had serious problems with the law and with mayhem long before Matthew Shepherd came along. Their entanglement with him was nothing new to their disordered lives.

On the other side, there are many stories of innocent boys who have been grotesquely murdered by homosexuals. We have one right here in Newton. Why isn’t the Boston Globe concerned about preventing the gruesome story about little Jeffrey Curley (right in the Globe’s own backyard) from happening again?

Prosecutors say the killers were sexually obsessed with young Jeffrey. They lured him from his neighborhood with the promise of a new bike. When he resisted, they smothered him with a gasoline-soaked rag. The two men molested and murdered the boy before stuffing his body into a concrete-filled container and dumping it in a Maine river.

The story of Matthew Shepard is very sad but why is it more tragic than what happened to 10-year-old Jeffrey Curley?

Hate from ‘People for American Way’

The report from P.A.W. started with the statement, “Anti-gay hatred is a staple of Religious Right organizations and figures.”

Then the President of P.A.W.’s foundation was quoted, “If this campaign is about truth or love, then George Orwell must be its honorary chairman.”

As proof, it quoted a mayoral candidate in Springdale, Arkansas, who said, “Homosexuals are perverts….I will do everything I can do to keep them out of Springdale.” Even in Arkansas, he was not elected.

It also cited a “Christian” radio talk-show host in Costa Mesa, California, as saying, “Lesbian love, sodomy are viewed by God as being detestable and abominable. Civil magistrates are to put people to death who practice these things.”

It would be nice to hear from anyone in their right mind who believes that any Christian believes that garbage!!

It’s no wonder that the people at P.A.W. see hate everywhere when they are so obsessed with it themselves.

for the aforementioned article, in my post? Yes, it was a study done in 2002.

Haters Are Radical Feminists from NOW and ACLU, Not Male Homosexuals

When still flush from their “victory” on July 17, 2002 where the Democratic legislature violated the state Constitution and refused to vote on (and thus illegally but effectively, killed the Protection of Marriage Amendment, because they knew it would be sent on to the people if a vote were allowed in the legislature), Bay Windows published a congratulatory editorial.

In it, they revealed that the main proponents of homosexual “marriage,” are not male homosexuals but radical feminists from NOW and their allies, who hate men. Their agenda is to destroy traditional marriage in any way they can because they believe it hurts all women.

If anyone is interested in the agenda of NOW and their friends, they should read my book written in 1998, “Freedom Will Conquer Racism and Sexism,” which tell this fascinating story of people and politics. It is available on our website.

The following story was run by us on September 3, 2002.

Liberals Are Responsible for Illegal Vote against Marriage, Bay Windows Confirms
AFL-CIO, ACLU, Anti-Defamation League and NOW Are Named
Tom Birmingham Acted on Orders of Union
Most Homosexuals Not Interested in 'Marriage'

By MassNews Staff
Bay Windows has confirmed it was powerful, national forces from the AFL-CIO, ACLU, Anti-Defamation League, NOW and other liberals who were behind the illegal adjournment of the vote on the Protection of Marriage Amendment on July 17.
The newspaper also indicated that most homosexuals are not interested in the subject. It was like pulling teeth to get them to contribute to the effort, one activist reported.
"This confirms what we have been saying," says Sarah McVay Pawlick, President of Mass. Citizens for Marriage.
"This is not primarily about homosexuality. It's about a powerful, liberal agenda to change our morality. These liberals are seeking a socialist state similar to Sweden or Cuba, with a free-love society in which children are the responsibility of the state, not their parents.
"That's why the national, liberal organizations are so interested in what is happening in Massachusetts. They are hiding behind homosexuals and others to achieve their political objectives.
"They wish to diminish the institution of marriage which has been the bedrock of our country since its founding. When the state was first founded, everyone knew what 'marriage' meant. So it was never written down. But it's obvious to everyone that we must do so now."
The Bay Windows editorial emphasized the importance of liberal allies when it wrote the following: "Gays and lesbians cannot win these fights on their own. They must have strong and committed straight allies, such as labor unions and the ACLU." It also listed other organizations and said, "Our hats are off to them."
Although Bay Windows did not say so, it is also obvious that the powerful Boston Globe and its owner, The New York Times, are important players in this attempt to increase the power of the state in our lives. Both papers reported about the Amendment only in a negative manner that was an attempt to damage it.

Some of Bay Windows Editorial Was Comical, Some Was Sad
Some of the Bay Windows Editorial is comical. Here are sound bites from the editorial with replies by Sarah McVay Pawlick, President of Mass. Citizens for Marriage.
Bay Windows: The Right chose Massachusetts because if they can win here, they can win anywhere: In their eyes we are the prize.
Pawlick: The truth is we chose Massachusetts because we live here. Our children and our grandchildren live here. The opposition has enormous help from national, liberal organizations, which are pouring in money and resources. We don't.
Bay Windows: They are zealots. They hate us with a passion.
Pawlick: The people at Bay Windows have known us since 1999. They know we hate no one.
Bay Windows: They view us as a good way to raise money.
Pawlick: This is comical. This is a good way to lose money. They complain in their article about the difficulties of raising money.
Bay Windows: A major defeat for the radical right.
Pawlick: They know we are not the radical right. We are part of the Greatest Generation which survived the depression, served in World War II and Korea. We love our country. We hate to see a further erosion of the traditional family and the free-fall in our society of sexual morality.
Sad Part
Pawlick: Unlike reporters from the Boston Globe or other media, we have always trusted reporters from Bay Windows because they report what we say accurately and completely. They do not play games with what we say. Although we disagree on most issues, we respect each other and agree to disagree. We received a call the other day from Scott Giordano who used to report for Bay Windows and is now with the Blade in Washington. Although very busy, we returned his call right away. That is why we are sad to see an Editorial such as this which has many inaccuracies in it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.