Possible correction regarding the Taiwan fire

I received a letter from a reader, which included information that may indicate that the concert in Taiwan was not a gay pride event.

It is true that homosexuality carries a strong stigma in Taiwan, much like it was in America some decades ago, so the event was certainly not an openly advertised gay pride event in the same sense that we see in Western countries. As a result, many who attended the event were not gays at all. I suspect that the event may have been a more subtle gay event.

The various articles that I read were all from authors who either supported or tolerated the gay rights movement, so their reporting was hardly biased against it. None of those articles were from Christian sources, where one might expect to read a report that was hostile to the gay movement.

But in the interest of fairness and accuracy, I hereby include an alternate perspective below. Perhaps more information will be revealed in the days ahead.

I have spent some time pursuing this story of the fire in Taiwan this morning. I wanted to verify that it was indeed a Gay themed event. The company that sponsors Color Play is not a homosexual company as far as I can tell. The use of colored powders sprayed over a crowd of people is sort of a social phenomena. People use these colored powders at all types of events, many of them not being gay related at all. Even kids parties use them.

I noted some errors in the Natural News article. Mike Adams states that they were using metallic powders, specifically mentioning magnesium, but others sites which have information on this company and its powders say that it is merely died cornstarch. Cornstarch will combust when dispersed in the air in high enough concentrations if it encounters a source of flame.

Mike Adams nowhere mentions any direct mention of this party being advertised as a Gay party. He suggests that homosexuality is not embraced openly in Taiwan so they would want to keep it under the radar. In the last hour Mike Adams has even revised his story, removing any mention of "Gay Pride" from the article. He states also that one of his primary news sources has also altered their story and says they never claimed this was a homosexual event.

One of the original arguments Mike Adams used was that the rainbow colors of the party indicated it was a Gay event. This is not true. Looking at the images he provided, the colors are not your typical rainbow colors associated with Gay pride. They merely seem to be colors associated with the company that sponsors these "Color Play" parties. One would expect that they would use colors in their banners and advertising, but that it would not be indicative of homosexuality.

The complete absence of homosexual symbols such as the rainbow, or slogans such as "Love Wins," etc., seem to be a glaring omission if this were intended to be a celebration of Gay marriage equality. The question also arises as to how this party was organized so quickly since the Supreme Court ruling was just the day before. It usually takes time to reserve a large venue like this and to arrange the services of a company like Color Play Asia.

Mike Adams' conclusions seem to be based upon the inclusion of an ad on the company's website that was placed by a clothing apparel company that caters to gay men. Such a company might advertise at a lot of venues where young people in large numbers would be known to gather. There is no evidence that this company was "a major sponsor" of the party as Mike Adams suggested. They appear to be merely one of a number of companies that purchased advertising. Their ad is no larger than any other company listed, among which is Family Mart, a company that I think would not want to be prominently linked to a Gay themed event in a country where family values do not embrace homosexuality.

The only other evidence provided was a Malaysian news source which also lacks any citations or specific details that could allow a reader to verify that the party was a celebration of the U.S. Gay marriage ruling. The writer may have merely assumed it was a Gay Pride event due to the mention of it being a Color Play party. After much searching, I have found nothing to substantiate the link to this being a Gay event. There were even young children present, and none of the victims pictured show any of the telltale signs of being Gay in their dress, or appearance. I am left with serious doubts that this was a Gay event and Mike Adams himself is now backtracking, and being somewhat disingenuous in doing so. He had already edited the title once, removing the phrase "Burned Alive" when people complained that it did not accurately reflect what happened. Now he has backtracked again, and the entire title has been replaced, as well as the content being altered.