Mostly good content, but fails when saying that WTF Taekwondo is purely a sport (it's called "sport taekwondo" many times throughout the site). It's pretty much the same martial art, only the patterns and competition rules change. WTF was chosen for the Olympics because WTF competition rules are generally considered to be safer for the practitioner. There's sport and competition in ITF as well. Also, it's funny how the site is biased towards ITF ("traditional") Taekwondo, but doesn't use Korean terminology (i.e. "outside crescent kick" instead of "bakkat chagi"). My WTF school is more traditional than that..."
It's pretty much the same martial art, only the patterns and competition rules change. This sounds like something my mom would say, If he was shorter, had darker hair and brown eyes, a smaller nose, and a bigger chin, he would look just like you. When compared to ITF Taekwondo, WTF Taekwondo uses different patterns, stresses kicking over everything else, uses little to no blocking or hand attacks, its kicks stress scoring over technique or power, its tournament rules make it a foot fencing competition, it uses uniforms of its own design, it has differing theories of power, such as it does not agree with the ITF theories of sine wave and knee spring, and it has its own version of how Taekwondo started, and yet you say the two are pretty much the same. They both are named Taekwondo and both have Korean roots, that is pretty much all they have in common.
WTF was chosen for the Olympics because WTF competition rules are generally considered to be safer for the practitioner. There was, and still is, a political battle between the WTF and the ITF over who should control Taekwondo in the Olympics. The rules of competition are not a factor, since rules can be easily changed. How is allowing full-power kicks to the head and knockouts safer than using controlled no or light-contact rules, especially when both types use the same type of safety equipment?
The site explains that it has a positive bias toward traditional Taekwondo, but not toward ITF Taekwondo. The site points out the pros and cons of both the WTF and the ITF, and has much criticism of both organizations and their theories. If you read the Read First topic, you will find I tell everyone upfront that I am biased toward traditional Taekwondo.
Site doesn't use Korean terminology. The site also explains its use of English terms. Koreans speak Korean; Americans speak English. There is no good reason to use Korean terminology other than it helps eliminate confusion during international competitions and it makes you sound "cool" and important when talking with non practitioners. Since very few Taekwondo practitioners will ever compete internationally, there is no need to use Korean terminology; it much more efficient to use the language of the practitioner's home country. Using or not using Korean terminology has little to do with whether a organization, school, or instructor is considered traditional or nontraditional.
There has always been criticism between the martial arts as to their effectiveness and the correctness of their theories. However, there seems to be an almost universal criticism of sport Taekwondo as being useless as a martial art. As with criticisms of many things, not all these criticisms are legitimate, but most are legitimate. A martial art is the art of hand-to-hand combat; which in modern terms means being able to effectively defend oneself in real life situations. Sport Taekwondo falls short in this respect. You will fight as you have trained to fight. If you train to stand with your arms at your sides and kick, that is the way you will react in self-defense situation and you will more than likely be defeated.
All these points are discussed in more detail in various topics within TKDTutor.com.