Tai Should Never Ride For Team Gb Again

[PHILIPRISING]

They're individuals with axes to grind for whatever reason, and of course, television appearances to make and books to sell. They undoubtedly have their reasons for their grievances, but it's the merely perspective of a handful of individuals who worked in large bureaucracies and that does not make them right.

 

I could turn my experiences with my ex-employers into elaborate conspiracies, and I've also sat in meetings with people who've come out with completely different opinions of what was agreed compared to what I heard with my own ears. Some people simply become blind to anything that doesn't conform with their agenda, and that I'm afraid is what conspiracy theorists do.

 

Susan Laudauer actually seems to be totally unhinged, but of course the conspiracists will tell you that's because the government has discredited her.

SOMETHING on which we totally agree... bingo! I spend a third of the year in the US and have never met anyone who gives any credence to Laudauer or anyone else who thinks 9/11 was some homegrown conspiracy.

 

In fact, where I live for most of the winter (Sarasota) is where the pilots trained and yet no one questioned that they only wanted to learn to take off and fly ... and didn't bother about landing. There was a clue there!

 

And back to Tai ... he's British and happy with that.

Edited November 12, 2015 by PHILIPRISING

[Midland Red]

Well Great Britain is the Team who he is riding for and the Country that he rides for in the GPs.

 

He's British in fact - that is all that matters.

He doesn't ride for any team in the GPs other than Team Woffinden

[The Voice Of Reason]

SOMETHING on which we totally agree... bingo! I spend a third of the year in the US and have never met anyone who gives any credence to Laudauer or anyone else who thinks 9/11 was some homegrown conspiracy.

 

In fact, where I live for most of the winter (Sarasota) is where the pilots trained and yet no one questioned that they only wanted to learn to take off and fly ... and didn't bother about landing. There was a clue there!

 

Never Philip? You've NEVER spoken to ANYONE that doubts the events of 9/11?

 

- You've NEVER met anyone that has questioned "where the wreckage was from the four airliners"?

- NEVER met anyone that has questioned how WTC 7 went into free fall when it wasn't even hit; and along with the twin towers, fell in seconds into their own footprints? The first time in history that THREE steel-enforced building have ever done so?

- NEVER had anyone question how four commercial airliners went off course but none were intercepted by the USAF - including one flying into the air space of the most protected building(s) on this planet (The White House & Pentagon)? Or wondered how a commercial airliner, with a wingspan of 38m managed to create a 5m hole in a building?

- Do these people that you HAVE spoken to disbelieve their own Countrymen; ex-FBI, ex-CIA, the NY firemen that were there on the day, NTSB Officials; and pilots with lifetimes within the forces (and continued as commercial pilots) who collectively say that such airmanship would have been impossible? Are these officials also 'conspiracy theorists'? Or should we simply believe everything that the Bush administration told us?

- They do not doubt how two airliners, and three buildings designed to take 'multiple airline hits' were reduced to dust; yet amazingly a FBI operative managed to find a passport, MADE OF PAPER, and belonging to one of the 'terrorists' was found at the scene?

- And, as for these 'pilots', are these the same people that were named within the 19 who were subsequently found to be alive and in some cases, still working as commercial pilots for Saudi Arabian Airlines?

 

Regarding (quote): "In fact, where I live for most of the winter (Sarasota) is where the pilots trained and yet no one questioned that they only wanted to learn to take off and fly ... and didn't bother about landing. There was a clue there!"

 

Can you refer me to any proof of this; apart from local Chinese whispers and/or "a guy in a bar told me"?

 

Do you know what.........I'm really not that surprised. I'm NOT a conspiracy theorist. I do not believe in ghosts, aliens or lizard people.

 

BUT when such an incident continues to have more unanswered questions than proven facts, it does make one just a tad sceptical. And when it involves a Nation with 'previous' of such lies, subterfuge and deceit (not to mention a MOTIVE) then excuse me if I'm not necessarily convinced by it's people who are, let's be honest, hardly the sharpest pencils in the box.

 

And for people that doubt the events of that day, YouTube is awash with MORE EVIDENCE to the contrary than what supposedly happened. And on the balance of probability, I know where I'd put my money on this one!

Edited November 13, 2015 by The Voice Of Reason

[BWitcher]

SOMETHING on which we totally agree... bingo! I spend a third of the year in the US and have never met anyone who gives any credence to Laudauer or anyone else who thinks 9/11 was some homegrown conspiracy.

 

In fact, where I live for most of the winter (Sarasota) is where the pilots trained and yet no one questioned that they only wanted to learn to take off and fly ... and didn't bother about landing. There was a clue there!

 

And back to Tai ... he's British and happy with that.

 

Really??

 

You must not speak to many folk then..

 

The fact is most peoples minds are so closed, it scares them to contemplate that they are consistently lied too... even though history shows that administrations have always done just that, especially the US one.

 

The 9/11 investigation was full of unanswered questions. Even the head of the investigation admits they were prevented from doing their jobs and that many things remain unexplained.

 

Voice of Reason of course forgot to add the announcement of Building 7 collapsing some 25 minutes before it did.

Edited November 13, 2015 by BWitcher

[Humphrey Appleby]

The 9/11 investigation was full of unanswered questions. Even the head of the investigation admits they were prevented from doing their jobs and that many things remain unexplained.

For all the apparently implausibilities there are plenty of plausible explanations as well, but conspiracy theorists don't want to hear those.

 

What I think it comes down to in the end, was that the US government was extremely embarrassed about the failures in its defensive preparations and coordination during 9/11. The country with the biggest defensive budget in the world was successfully attacked in a low budget manner by amateurs, and of course there were people in the government who needed to cover their asses.

 

However, there are plenty of explanations as to how it could happen. US defensive doctrine since WW2 was almost entirely based around being attacked by bombers and ICBMs over the North Pole, or latterly from SLBMs off their coast - astonishing as it is to believe, but the US had virtually no radar coverage to its south until apparently well into the 1980s, and only then because of the drug smuggling. In the 20th century they had never experienced land-based attacks, nor much in the way of aircraft hijackings or terrorism on home soil, so there was limited reason to have procedures or drills in the event of something like 9/11 happening. People ask how could a superpower have such major defensive failings, but the simple fact of the matter is that even superpowers prioritise their capabilities against the greatest perceived threats.

 

The other factor is that 9/11 was a sneak attack without warning, so there was no reason for the military to be on high alert. In most conventional conflicts you see tensions building up in advance which gives the military some time to mobilise and drill for an impending attack. In a sneak attack scenario though, of course there's going to be confusion, lack of coordination, misinformation and people finding some bureaucrat somewhere has forgotten to pay the phone bill when they try to call the air force. I consider this not unusual or surprising at all given my interactions with military people.

 

Voice of Reason of course forgot to add the announcement of Building 7 collapsing some 25 minutes before it did.

This could just as easily be attributed to confusion on the day - lots of garbled reports and rumours and someone trying to report on them under difficult conditions. I think it's unlikely that the reporter would have known which building was which, so I'm afraid I don't see this as evidence of a conspiracy. There are also eye witness reports that suggest WTC 7 was showing signs of imminent collapse - sagging in the middle for some hours due to loss of structural integrity - so it's quite easy to see how incorrect information may have been provided to the reporter.

 

The question you really have to ask though, is why would the US government want to blow up WTC 7 some hours after the fact, or release the information early to a foreign news service (i.e. the BBC)? This is where the conspiracy theories fall down.

Edited November 13, 2015 by Humphrey Appleby

[Midland Red]

Never Philip? You've NEVER spoken to ANYONE that doubts the events of 9/11?

- You've NEVER met anyone that has questioned "where the wreckage was from the four airliners"?

- NEVER met anyone that has questioned how WTC 7 went into free fall when it wasn't even hit; and along with the twin towers, fell in seconds into their own footprints? The first time in history that THREE steel-enforced building have ever done so?

- NEVER had anyone question how four commercial airliners went off course but none were intercepted by the USAF - including one flying into the air space of the most protected building(s) on this planet (The White House & Pentagon)? Or wondered how a commercial airliner, with a wingspan of 38m managed to create a 5m hole in a building?

- Do these people that you HAVE spoken to disbelieve their own Countrymen; ex-FBI, ex-CIA, the NY firemen that were there on the day, NTSB Officials; and pilots with lifetimes within the forces (and continued as commercial pilots) who collectively say that such airmanship would have been impossible? Are these officials also 'conspiracy theorists'? Or should we simply believe everything that the Bush administration told us?

- They do not doubt how two airliners, and three buildings designed to take 'multiple airline hits' were reduced to dust; yet amazingly a FBI operative managed to find a passport, MADE OF PAPER, and belonging to one of the 'terrorists' was found at the scene?

- And, as for these 'pilots', are these the same people that were named within the 19 who were subsequently found to be alive and in some cases, still working as commercial pilots for Saudi Arabian Airlines?

Regarding (quote): "In fact, where I live for most of the winter (Sarasota) is where the pilots trained and yet no one questioned that they only wanted to learn to take off and fly ... and didn't bother about landing. There was a clue there!"

Can you refer me to any proof of this; apart from local Chinese whispers and/or "a guy in a bar told me"?

Do you know what.........I'm really not that surprised. I'm NOT a conspiracy theorist. I do not believe in ghosts, aliens or lizard people.

BUT when such an incident continues to have more unanswered questions than proven facts, it does make one just a tad sceptical. And when it involves a Nation with 'previous' of such lies, subterfuge and deceit (not to mention a MOTIVE) then excuse me if I'm not necessarily convinced by it's people who are, let's be honest, hardly the sharpest pencils in the box.

And for people that doubt the events of that day, YouTube is awash with MORE EVIDENCE to the contrary than what supposedly happened. And on the balance of probability, I know where I'd put my money on this one!

The same country which claimed to have put men on the moon!

[The Voice Of Reason]

Humphrey........"my dear man".

 

Embarrassed? Oh my word, what a wonderfully blinkered approach.

 

How many times, in the 12 months leading up to 9/11, were defensive jets deployed whenever an airliner went just slightly off course, or lost communication?

 

67 times.

 

How many jets were scrambled on 9/11.......including when air space was encroached around the most DEFENDED City on this planet - Washington? NONE. Read that again. NONE. Four independent incidents; three in completely seperate locations. Not one fighter jet deployed. That isn't 'conspiracy' - that is FACT. It ISN'T an embarrassment through oversight; unless of course you believe in such 'coincidences'.

 

And, as I said before, WHERE is the wreckage of any airliner? They ALL just vanished into vapour? Seriously? The apparent thwarted attack in Pennsylvania.....a 'crash site' with not a single piece of aircraft remaining for the NTSB to investigate. Not a single body. What survived? A couple of bandannas that must have belonged to terrorists. Please don't insult my intelligence.

 

Reading your posts, I consider you to be a pretty intelligent, common-sense kind of guy. I certainly don't consider myself to be a dimwit.

 

But honestly old chap, if you believe the lies and deceit surrounding this event, then I truly despair.

 

But you have your point of view; I have mine. Maybe I'd even consider your side of the argument justifiable. However, just answer me this ONE question.

 

HOW, and WHY, did WTC 7 come down? Please do not say 'fire' or 'flying debris' as that has already been disproven many, many times; and never actually proven to be possible; other than via a controlled explosion. And please explain why it was overlooked within the 'Official' 9/11 report?

 

Answer that, and I may even start to believe.

Edited November 13, 2015 by The Voice Of Reason

[Grachan]

we all know he is Aussie, yet so desperate to claim him as British for his world titles, superficial bullpoo

Actually he's not an Aussie. He has no claim on being Australian.

 

British parents. Born in Britain. Never lived in Australia long enough to qualify for citizenship.

 

Maybe he has a strong connection with the country, and grew up singing their national anthem in school - but he ain't an Aussie.

 

Jason Crump is more British than Tai is Australian.

Edited November 13, 2015 by grachan

[lucifer sam]

Actually he's not an Aussie. He has no claim on being Australian.

 

British parents. Born in Britain. Never lived in Australia long enough to qualify for citizenship.

 

Maybe he has a strong connection with the country, and grew up singing their national anthem in school - but he ain't an Aussie.

 

Jason Crump is more British than Tai is Australian.

 

Hear, hear.

 

Mind you, some people are not interested in the actual facts.

 

Tai Woffinden is British. End of.

 

All the best

Rob

[BWitcher]

For all the apparently implausibilities there are plenty of plausible explanations as well, but conspiracy theorists don't want to hear those.

 

 

 

The question you really have to ask though, is why would the US government want to blow up WTC 7 some hours after the fact, or release the information early to a foreign news service (i.e. the BBC)? This is where the conspiracy theories fall down.

 

The stock answer.. there are 'plausible explanations'.

 

No there aren't. The official head of the investigation has clearly stated that there aren't. The 'plausible explanations' are as much theory as the ones labelled a 'conspiracy' and backed up with no evidence.

 

As for Building 7.. , there weren't buildings falling down left right and centre, two collapsed, they were quite big and you couldn't really miss them.

 

I accept many of the conspiracy theories are wild and wacky and full of holes, BUT there are many, many unanswered questions that cast a great deal of doubt on the official version of events. Sadly, many folk throw them all into one pot, which is precisely what the authorities want you to do.

 

Anyway, probably one of the biggest sidetracks on a thread ever!

 

 

Back to the point.

 

Tai Woffinden is British.

 

That is a fact we can agree on

Edited November 13, 2015 by BWitcher

[Giacomelli]

Never Philip? You've NEVER spoken to ANYONE that doubts the events of 9/11?

 

- You've NEVER met anyone that has questioned "where the wreckage was from the four airliners"?

- NEVER met anyone that has questioned how WTC 7 went into free fall when it wasn't even hit; and along with the twin towers, fell in seconds into their own footprints? The first time in history that THREE steel-enforced building have ever done so?

- NEVER had anyone question how four commercial airliners went off course but none were intercepted by the USAF - including one flying into the air space of the most protected building(s) on this planet (The White House & Pentagon)? Or wondered how a commercial airliner, with a wingspan of 38m managed to create a 5m hole in a building?

- Do these people that you HAVE spoken to disbelieve their own Countrymen; ex-FBI, ex-CIA, the NY firemen that were there on the day, NTSB Officials; and pilots with lifetimes within the forces (and continued as commercial pilots) who collectively say that such airmanship would have been impossible? Are these officials also 'conspiracy theorists'? Or should we simply believe everything that the Bush administration told us?

- They do not doubt how two airliners, and three buildings designed to take 'multiple airline hits' were reduced to dust; yet amazingly a FBI operative managed to find a passport, MADE OF PAPER, and belonging to one of the 'terrorists' was found at the scene?

- And, as for these 'pilots', are these the same people that were named within the 19 who were subsequently found to be alive and in some cases, still working as commercial pilots for Saudi Arabian Airlines?

 

Regarding (quote): "In fact, where I live for most of the winter (Sarasota) is where the pilots trained and yet no one questioned that they only wanted to learn to take off and fly ... and didn't bother about landing. There was a clue there!"

 

Can you refer me to any proof of this; apart from local Chinese whispers and/or "a guy in a bar told me"?

 

Do you know what.........I'm really not that surprised. I'm NOT a conspiracy theorist. I do not believe in ghosts, aliens or lizard people.

 

BUT when such an incident continues to have more unanswered questions than proven facts, it does make one just a tad sceptical. And when it involves a Nation with 'previous' of such lies, subterfuge and deceit (not to mention a MOTIVE) then excuse me if I'm not necessarily convinced by it's people who are, let's be honest, hardly the sharpest pencils in the box.

 

And for people that doubt the events of that day, YouTube is awash with MORE EVIDENCE to the contrary than what supposedly happened. And on the balance of probability, I know where I'd put my money on this one!

A thread that starts about Tai Woffinden and strays onto the events of 9/11....that is special even by BSF standards!!

[Trees]

Interesting

[Humphrey Appleby]

A thread that starts about Tai Woffinden and strays onto the events of 9/11....that is special even by BSF standards!!

It's because it was a dastardly conspiracy of the Australian government to have one of their riders masquerade as a Brit (where's the evidence he was actually born in the UK - birth certificates can be faked you know) and win the world championship to bring down the British national anthem.

[PHILIPRISING]

It's because it was a dastardly conspiracy of the Australian government to have one of their riders masquerade as a Brit (where's the evidence he was actually born in the UK - birth certificates can be faked you know) and win the world championship to bring down the British national anthem.

LIKE it ... that's twice in 24 hours!

[speedibee]

Actually he's not an Aussie. He has no claim on being Australian.

 

British parents. Born in Britain. Never lived in Australia long enough to qualify for citizenship.

 

Maybe he has a strong connection with the country, and grew up singing their national anthem in school - but he ain't an Aussie.

 

Jason Crump is more British than Tai is Australian.

how has he got an Australian passport then ? biggest surprise here is you, actually fabricating things to weight your argument , I thought you were above that sort of thing but obviously I'm mistaken on that

[SCB]

how has he got an Australian passport then ? biggest surprise here is you, actually fabricating things to weight your argument , I thought you were above that sort of thing but obviously I'm mistaken on that

I think his point was that Tai couldn't be Australian even if he wanted to be. Yet Crump could be British or Australian.

[Conkers in Gravy]

I never thought I'd see being born in a country (the prime qualification for international sport) being described as a technicality.

Which part of "born in Scunthorpe" is so hard to understand? It doesn't matter whether he bares his backside during the anthem - he's British and entitled to race for Great Britain if he wants to.

There's the persistent suggestion from a minority on here that he is "using" British speedway for his own ends. So what? He's entitled to as he qualifies to come through our system because he was BORN IN SCUNTHORPE. Even if he is "using" the system, the deal is a good one. He gains a career in the sport and we get a double world champion in return. I'll settle for that.

[Grachan]

how has he got an Australian passport then ? biggest surprise here is you, actually fabricating things to weight your argument , I thought you were above that sort of thing but obviously I'm mistaken on that

Has he? Didn't he say, when interviewed at the Grand Prix, that he only had a 3 month visa for Australia? Why would he need a visa if he had an Australian passport?

 

I'm not fabricating anything. Why do you say I am fabricating stuff? I looked it up. These are the rules for Australian Citizenship.

 

http://www.beyderwellen.com/immigration-questions/2.html#FAQ2

 

"Q2: How do I become an Australian Citizen?

 

You may become a citizen of Australia in one of three possible ways. These are:

 

By birth: In Australia people automatically become an Australian citizen if they are born here and one or both of their parents is an Australian citizen or permanent resident of Australia.

 

By descent: If you are the child of an Australian citizen but you are born overseas you will generally be granted Australian citizenship. There are a number of rules that might apply to people in this category. These are indicated in the Australian Citizenship Act, 2007.

 

By grant: If you are a non-citizen of Australia you can apply to become an Australian citizen. You must meet several requirements, which generally are that you:

 

Are an Australian permanent resident

Are over 16 years of age

Have lived in Australia as a lawful resident for a total of four years where absences of a cumulative duration of less than 12 months will not matter, including 12 months as a permanent resident immediately preceding the date of application where absences of a cumulative duration of less than 3 months during this period will not matter

Are of good character

Have a knowledge of basic English

Have an adequate knowledge of your responsibilities and privileges as a citizen

Are likely to reside in, or to maintain a close and continuing association with, Australia if granted citizenship"

 

Seeing as Tai moved back to the UK at 15 to takeup a Speedway career, perhaps you can tell me which part he qualifies under?

 

Plus he was born in the UK to British parents. Even if they became Austrlian citizens he would not have the right by birth as far as I can see.

 

If he has Australian citizenship then it doesn't fit in with what I have read on it.

 

(Edit - just realised you may have been referring to Jason Crump - in which case it's as SCB says. Jason has a case for British nationality, but, as far as I can tell, Tai doesn't have one for Australian nationality)

Edited November 13, 2015 by grachan

[speedibee]

Has he? Didn't he say, when interviewed at the Grand Prix, that he only had a 3 month visa for Australia? Why would he need a visa if he had an Australian passport?

 

I'm not fabricating anything. Why do you say I am fabricating stuff? I looked it up. These are the rules for Australian Citizenship.

 

http://www.beyderwellen.com/immigration-questions/2.html#FAQ2

 

"Q2: How do I become an Australian Citizen?

 

You may become a citizen of Australia in one of three possible ways. These are:

 

By birth: In Australia people automatically become an Australian citizen if they are born here and one or both of their parents is an Australian citizen or permanent resident of Australia.

 

By descent: If you are the child of an Australian citizen but you are born overseas you will generally be granted Australian citizenship. There are a number of rules that might apply to people in this category. These are indicated in the Australian Citizenship Act, 2007.

 

By grant: If you are a non-citizen of Australia you can apply to become an Australian citizen. You must meet several requirements, which generally are that you:

 

Are an Australian permanent resident

Are over 16 years of age

Have lived in Australia as a lawful resident for a total of four years where absences of a cumulative duration of less than 12 months will not matter, including 12 months as a permanent resident immediately preceding the date of application where absences of a cumulative duration of less than 3 months during this period will not matter

Are of good character

Have a knowledge of basic English

Have an adequate knowledge of your responsibilities and privileges as a citizen

Are likely to reside in, or to maintain a close and continuing association with, Australia if granted citizenship"

 

Seeing as Tai moved back to the UK at 15 to takeup a Speedway career, perhaps you can tell me which part he qualifies under?

 

Plus he was born in the UK to British parents. Even if they became Austrlian citizens he would not have the right by birth as far as I can see. You can't see very far can you , perhapos your vision is blurred by some outside influence

 

If he has Australian citizenship then it doesn't fit in with what I have read on it.

 

(Edit - just realised you may have been referring to Jason Crump - in which case it's as SCB says. Jason has a case for British nationality, but, as far as I can tell, Tai doesn't have one for Australian nationality)

As You say according to those rules ,Tai could not be Australian , so all the debate and cajoling to get Tai to agree to being british a few years back was a complete waste of time since he had no choice . and when his speedway career comes to a close he will have to apply like everybody else ,If he wants to emigrate and live in the house he owns there ,

Edited November 13, 2015 by speedibee

[iris123]

There are though exceptions to all rules.Top sports people for instance?If Australia need an Olympic champ or world champ.......