Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
London Bombings: Conspiracies
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 119, 120, 121  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Anonymous
PostPosted: 07-07-2005 15:29    Post subject: London Bombings: Conspiracies Reply with quote

[Emp edit: Split off from the Terror Alerts thread:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15632

See also the other mainstream threads on the London bombing:

News:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22742

Discussion:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22746

and the less mainstream thread on the Numerology of Terror:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=557038#557038 ]

--------------------------
Yeah all these terrorist threats are clearly a load of old rubbish to keep us all too terrified to object to I.D. Cards, punative anti-terrorist laws etc etc.

As it happens I don't think that the latter two do any good, just look at Northern Ireland in the late 1970's and the position with I.D. cards in France.

I hope all London based subscribers to the site are safe and well.

Bakerlamb,

London 7/7/05
Back to top
YithianOffline
Keeping the British end up
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Total posts: 8770
Location: Vermilion Sands
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 07-07-2005 15:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

But ID cards would have had no impact or bearing on today's attacks.

Last edited by Yithian on 09-10-2006 16:34; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Mighty_EmperorOffline
Divine Wind
Joined: 18 Aug 2002
Total posts: 19440
Location: Mongo
Age: 43
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 07-07-2005 20:38    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd imagine that the attacks today may help galvanse support for them and force the legislation through parliament.

-------------------
I'll direct any specific discussion on the Lonon bombings here:

News:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22742

Discussion:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22746
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
pizzed_offOffline
with the luggage
Joined: 06 Nov 2002
Total posts: 1706
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 00:26    Post subject: Reply with quote

well if the security forces are that good according blair et al

then theyve f-cked up really bad yesterday
Back to top
View user's profile 
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 5732
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 01:59    Post subject: Reply with quote

Will there be a reflex surge in support for ID cards? Draconian measures followed by yet more abject apologies for their failure?

The seeming chaos of these terror-events is misleading for they have an awful symmetry.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
ENTIANONMULTIOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Total posts: 382
Location: Miskatonic University Engineering Department
Age: 37
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 07:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

melf wrote:
well if the security forces are that good according blair et al

then theyve f-cked up really bad yesterday


possibly Melf, but preventing something from happening isn't noticeable how many attacks have they prevented? they are put in a position where they have to get it right every time whereas the terrorists only need to get lucky once
Back to top
View user's profile 
StormkhanOffline
Disturbingly familiar
Joined: 28 May 2003
Total posts: 3897
Location: Robin Hood country.
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 07:17    Post subject: Reply with quote

The trouble with counter-terrorism is that you have to make plans for many different scenarios while the terrorist only needs to work intensively on one. The Intelligence Services might skim off information and data but it's interpretation that allows this to be of use.

There will probably be more support for ID cards (however misguided) but will Transport for London still want to sell ... er ... set up mobile phone links on the tube sytem? I know they're up for a fast buck but it seems like the most stupid thing they could do, especially after yesterday. It might not have prevented the bombings but they don't have to supply them with another method of detonation.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
JonfairwayOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1270
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 10:21    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good Morning folks

Well not good at all really, still.

Came across this news piece yesterday, I am finding it quite difficult this week to be conspiratorial at all but I am susupicious about any terrorist attacks by nature I suppose.

Anyway have a read and see what you think.



Quote:
Following a series of explosions across London today, more than 30 people have been killed and around 300 injured.

Earlier reports indicated that there were 6 explosions, but the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, has stated that there were at least four.

The first explosion occurred at 8.49am (during the rush hour) and three more over the following 58 minutes.

Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who was at the G8 summit in Gleneagles, said of the attack "There will be time to talk later about this, but it is important however that those engaged in terrorism realise that our determination to defend our values and our way of life is greater than their determination to cause death and destruction to innocent people in a desire to impose extremism on the world. Whatever they do, it is our determination that they will never succeed in destroying what we hold dear in this country and in other civlised nations throughout the world"

Bearing in mind that Blair made this "speech" quite soon after the attack, what made him so certain it was terrorists? The police were unable to confirm this at the time and they were nearer to the destruction than Blair was. Isn't it also strange how someone can deliver such a nicely prepared speech at a tragic time like this? Surely a more normal reaction would be to offer some comfort and sympathy to the victims (he did spare a few words for them) and say that he will make a comment later after he has heard all the reports.

But no, Blair dedicates more of his message to defeating the "terrorists" who he assumed, at the time, were responsible. Whilst this might be a good guess to make, shouldn't someone in his position wait until it is confirmed first?

Just like the 9/11 attack in America, the public were informed quite quickly who were involved. In our last article we predicted that Al-Qaeda would soon be pointed out as the culprits by certain members of the media who support Bush and Blair, and sure enough, within a few hours reports of messages on a website started to appear. The group claiming responsibility had never been heard of before (how many different branches of Al-Qaeda are there?) and the source could not be verified (of course). The group call themselves the Secret Organisation Group of al Qaeda of Jihad Organisation in Europe (how convenient for a new European Group to appear just now).

We also predicted that "Iran" would appear in the picture as well and although this hasn't happened yet (as far as we know), we feel sure that it will very soon.

Does anyone else find it odd that when the popularity of certain politicians fade in respect of the war on terrorism, up pops another attack to inject a little life back into the cause. Is it just a coincidence, are we paranoid or is someone being a little too obvious?

Many may read this and think we are seeing things that do not exist, but are we? Does bombing London really help the terrorist cause? If not terrorists, who else would gain from such an attack?

Both Bush and Blair have been under pressure with the "Downing Street Memo", which indicates that they both tried to find a reason to invade Iraq. Perhaps after the London bombing they will start saying that the illegal invasion of Iraq was to prevent such terrorist attacks happening. Although in reality, terrorisim has increased since Bush came to power.

We suspect that both Bush and Blair, with the help of "their" media, will be providing us with "slam dunk" proof that Al-Qaeda was responsible, including the names of those behind it and which country they are hiding in (Iran of course!). Doesn't it all sound famaliar?

You may wish to read our previous article that will offer a few clues as to where the next attack may occur. This may be sooner than you think.
London has been hit by at least 6 explosions in what Prime Minister Tony Blair has called a terrorist attack.

The explosions happened this morning during the rush hour and at least two people have reportedly been killed and many more injured (it is likely the death toll will rise)

Although it is too soon to say what exactly caused the explosions and who was responsible, Tony Blair has already placed the blame on terrorists.

Apparently there was some "warning" and for some reason Scotland Yard informed Israel just minutes before the explosions happened, according to a senior Israeli official.

It is uncertain why Israel should need to know about a possible terrorist attack on London or why Scotland Yard should waste valuable time in calling other countries instead of preparing Londoners for this attack?

The explosions occurred in the subway and on a double-decker bus which was almost cut in half.

Some of the areas affected were Aldgate station, Edgware Road, King's Cross, Old Street and Russell Square.

The explosions caused the Stocks to fall on European markets and the price of oil rose on the news.

Whilst the loss of life, injuries and destruction from these explosions are obviously real enough, we can't help but worry that maybe this is not the work of some Middle Eastern terrorist organization (which we are certain will be named in the next few days as being responsible) and urge people to examine the information they are given carefully.

As with the 9/11 attack in the USA, people will naturally be angry and afraid, and ready to vent their anger on the most likely suspects. But they should also consider that maybe this is the intended reaction that is required of them and remember how well this worked after the 9/11 attack.

It is of course a difficult time to talk of conspiracies when people are dying and injured after such a terrible "attack", but it is important to look at all the possibilities rather than automatically accept the version they will be given.

The terrible explosions could be the work of terrorists and there may not be any sinister involvement from other sources, but it can't be ruled out.

We have written recently (as have many other sites) that an attack on Iran is expected shortly, but the United States and Tony Blair need a much stronger reason than before (in respect of Iraq). It is our belief that an "attack" similar to 9/11 would be required to gain any support.

The "attack" in London, as terrible as it is, may be just a prelude to something much bigger and just an example to Europe that it too is a target. Our article Al-Qaeda, Iran and the next 9/11 offers a possible method in which support may be achieved?

In the meantime, our sympathies go out to the those affected by these explosions in London and hope that those responsible for this horrific act will be brought to justice.

We should also remember that Tony Blair should be held accountable for bringing terror to Britain, by involving the country in an illegal war in the first place. Whilst this may be no excuse for such attacks, the British Prime Minister has involved the British public in a war that they didn't want or need, purely to support a US president with ambitions of global domination. Once the casualties in London have been taken care of, the public should demand Blair's resignation and withdraw the troops from Afghanistan and Iraq immediately!

Most of the media outlets that are supportive of Bush and Blair will quickly try to tie in this attack to Al-Qaeda and probably suggest an "Iranian" connection. This will be our first sign (and a warning to others) that the next stage is shortly to be put into action, followed by a demand that Iran be attacked for "supporting" this terrorism. We might be wrong, but we shall find out soon enough and hope that others see this too.






http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/07/07/MN1028.htm

http://www.profindpages.com/news/2005/07/07/MN1027.htm
Back to top
View user's profile 
coldelephant
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 11:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was a terrible thing to have happened - but it could have been worse -the terrorists could have planted a bomb in Hyde Park during the Live 8 concert - there were 350,000 people all squashed together on that day.

If they wanted publicity then they got it anyway; although some of the media I think is doing a pretty good job of showing how calm and strong people were on the day and how well the emergency services did which should quash the statements made by a minority of people who said there was chaos decending into pandaemonium and stuff.

The more publicity there is showing how little the terrorists managed to achieve, the better.
Back to top
YithianOffline
Keeping the British end up
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Total posts: 8770
Location: Vermilion Sands
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 11:33    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Earlier reports indicated that there were 6 explosions, but the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, has stated that there were at least four.


Initial inconsistency in the number of explosions reported was attributed to natural confusion coupled with the media jumping the gun in broadcasting rumours, as well as controlled explosions being used on suspicious articles. Also, survivors left some tube stations by different exits (some trekked down long tunnels to exit at a supposedly safer stations) leading observers to believe the attacks were happening at more than one location.

Quote:
Bearing in mind that Blair made this "speech" quite soon after the attack, what made him so certain it was terrorists? The police were unable to confirm this at the time and they were nearer to the destruction than Blair was.


The police were unable to confirm to the public. I think it's fair to say that Blair gets better info than John Smith.

Quote:
Isn't it also strange how someone can deliver such a nicely prepared speech at a tragic time like this?


No, that's the essence of his job and as a politician he has had years of training in doing it. Personally, i thought his first speak was quite weak for the strong speaker he has proved to be.

Quote:
In our last article we predicted that Al-Qaeda would soon be pointed out as the culprits by certain members of the media who support Bush and Blair


I think somebody in a cockney accent may yell "They've got form Guv!" just here.

Quote:
It is uncertain why Israel should need to know about a possible terrorist attack on London or why Scotland Yard should waste valuable time in calling other countries instead of preparing Londoners for this attack?


If, as has not been confirmed, warnings were issued it may be something to do with Israeli Finance Minister (and former Prime Minister) Benjamin Netanyahu being due to attend a meeting a short distance from a potential bomb-site. I think it's fair to say a single phonecall from a desk-jockey would not detract from the overall state of preparedness of London's Emergency services - who did admirably on the day, i would judge.

The rest of the article is vague speculation.

I'm happy to see alternative readings of incongrous 'facts' but this one is just poor. Give them a few week to work on something stronger - preferably with more Reptilians and Venusians... Though they did manage the token seeds of anti-semitism! Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 11:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Yithian wrote:


The police were unable to confirm to the public. I think it's fair to say that Blair gets better info than John Smith.


sorry but i had to have a little chuckle at the irony with the choice of name. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile 
YithianOffline
Keeping the British end up
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Total posts: 8770
Location: Vermilion Sands
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 11:44    Post subject: Reply with quote

ted maul wrote:
The Yithian wrote:


The police were unable to confirm to the public. I think it's fair to say that Blair gets better info than John Smith.


sorry but i had to have a little chuckle at the irony with the choice of name. Laughing


Oops, yes. Well, i don't like Joe Bloggs much and i'm not an American so John Doe is out...

Henceforth: Johnny on the spot.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
JonfairwayOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1270
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 12:27    Post subject: Reply with quote

More vague speculations

Quote:
Cui bono? Stupidity Versus Logic in the Latest “Terror” Attack


by Anthony Wade

http://www.opednews.com

July 7, 2005

Wow, al Qaeda must be the stupidest terrorists, no wait, stupidest people period, on this entire planet. Their purported goal is to shake the will of the western powers that have invaded Iraq, and to drive them out, no? Then can someone please explain to me the logic of the London bombings? No seriously, it is time to apply logic to these events. Please do not hand me the nonsense about these people being “killers” who do not apply logic. You do not become the number one terrorist organization without having some logic, no? We are expected to swallow that these people were smart enough to circumvent our billion dollar intelligence and air defense systems with box cutters, but they cannot play coherent cause-effect scenarios out in their mind prior to carrying out terrorist activities? I doubt that very much.

Just this week, it was reported that England had drafted plans to pull out their troops, gone, see you later, victory for al Qaeda, right? So we are to believe then that the orchestrated response to these plans was to blow up a double decker bus, in England. Now, can you guess what the most likely response to such an event would be:

1) Pull the troops out faster
2) Galvanize public support, thus keeping the troops in Iraq

Those of you that selected number one, I will assume you work for the Bush administration. Those of you that selected number two, good job. Now that we have established the enormous stupidity in the England bombings, the next logical front to examine is here in the United States.

Let’s examine the political climate here in this country just prior to this “attack”. Support for the Iraq War was at an all time low. People were unmoved by the President’s speech, dropping his overall approval rating to 43%. The drums of impeachment were growing louder with each passing day, with the revelations that the Downing Street Memos do indeed prove that George Bush committed felonies in lying to Congress and starting war without Congressional approval. Also on our political front was the Valerie Plame story and how it appears there is a good chance that Karl Rove committed treason in outing a covert CIA operative, who just happened to be assigned to uncovering WMD. Considering the closeness of Rove to Bush, if these allegations proved to be true, then how much of a stretch is it to assume Bush had complete foreknowledge of the revenge against Joe Wilson by outing his wife.

Now the corporate media has tried very hard to ignore these stories. We have had coverage of the Michael Jackson trial, and most recently the missing girl in Aruba for months now as Bush’s world unraveled daily. No offense to the Holloway family but the story about Natalie’s events should not be a lead story on any news show, with the possibility of impeachment, treason, and the Iraq War events happening daily. But there was our media, firmly in the pocket of George Bush, pimping the pain of the Holloway family as the most important news story. This aside though, the real stories were finally starting to poke through. Mainstream media received so many complaints about their ignoring potentially Bush-damaging stories, that they finally had to cover them.

Now, from al Qaeda’s perspective one would logically conclude this is a good thing. We were told by the Bushies that a vote for John Kerry was a vote for al Qaeda because they were so afraid of the great warrior, Bush. Considering the plummeting poll numbers for Bush and calls from the grass roots in this country for his political head, one should conclude that al Qaeda would be happy that the news had finally turned its attention to the possibility of getting rid of Bush. Please do not hand me the nonsense about how they do not look at these events. We are led to believe that al Qaeda runs their own website so they can leak stories that help Bush and claim credit for their own terrorist activities so it is obvious they are on the cutting edge of technology and Internet news.

So I ask again, given that the events in the US are in the favor of al Qaeda, and that public opinion for the war had been steadily eroding, I must ask the obvious question. Why in the world would they now carry out another terrorist mission? Are we honestly to believe they did not think about what the ramifications were? If the war was going poorly for them and the world was united against them, then I could understand an attack to break our will, but when things are going well, why in the world would they carry out this attack? It has now been reported that:
“BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said a previously unknown group calling itself the Secret Organisation Group of al-Qaeda of Jihad Organisation in Europe had claimed to be behind the attacks in a statement posted on an Islamist website.
The group's statement said the attacks were revenge for the "massacres" Britain was committing in Iraq and Afghanistan and that the country was now "burning with fear and panic", he added.”
Uh-huh. So, al Qaeda carried out the attacks for the massacres committed by the British troops, which are miniscule in comparison to the US. They further carried out the attacks in complete obliviousness to the news of the imminent British troop pullout. They further carried out these attacks despite the fact that Bush’s poll numbers were in the toilet and heading lower, leading to a possibility of impeachment. They further carried out these attacks even though the media had finally begun to cover the stories that could be potentially damaging to the entire war machine that they are fighting against. Wow, they are some stupid terrorists.
The level of stupidity is equal to when Osama bin Laden released his latest hit video, four days before the Presidential election. Surely he must have realized that would have only aided Bush, yet there he was providing America with a little fear before the election, a move that only could have helped Bush. Today, here is his little outfit, al Qaeda, once again coming to the aide of his alleged arch-nemesis Bush.
Cui bono is a Latin phrase which simply means, “Who benefits?” and it is the question we need to be asking ourselves. What does al Qaeda gain from this attack? The only logical answer can be, NOTHING. It will instill fear in the populace which could lead to a galvanizing of public support for the war they are fighting. It may lead to England changing their plans about pulling out their troops. It will give the US corporate media an excuse to not cover the stories that had been corroding the support for Bush. Instead of the potential impeachment, treason by Karl Rove, and the Downing Street Memos, the corporate media will be hammering the story about the terror attacks in England and how they show the need for this continuous war. I am sorry but when asking cui bono, it is clear that al Qaeda does not benefit from this attack, as it undermines everything they are working toward.
The war machine however, they benefit greatly. Their two main proponents, Bush and Blair get to play on people’s fears and reinvigorate support for their war. This event is only a few hours old, but here are their initial responses:
"They are trying to use the slaughter of innocent people to cow us, to frighten us out of doing the things that we want to do. They "should not and they must not succeed," – Tony Blair.
Really Tony? But your government had already decided to pull the troops out of England, so why would they need to carry out this attack and risk England changing their minds? No Tony, there is clearly no logic behind this attack and they clearly are not trying to frighten a people who have already agreed to pull out their troops, and who only represent less than 5% of the troops to begin with.
Here is what our fearless leader, Bush, had to say today:
“"The war on terror goes on."
Ah yes, every now and again, people who lie for a living slip up and reveal the truth. This statement reveals exactly the purpose of the attacks, and answers the question, cui bono. Faced with plummeting poll numbers and declining public support Bush tried last week to calm the storm by going to the American people with more fantasies connecting 911 to Iraq. The American people did not buy it this time though and his numbers got worse. Then the “Karl Rove is a treasonous traitor” stories started popping up and Bush was faced with the prospect of his war not continuing and his staunchest ally, England announced their plans for pulling troops out just as George was saying what a mistake it would be to make such plans. The morale in the al Qaeda camp must have been at an all time high. Their efforts in the war were finally paying off. Bush was losing his public support and his own country was beginning to speak about removing him from office. His top aide was under investigation for possible treason. England had started to make plans to pull out their troops.
So it is at this time, we are to believe that an organization smart enough to pull off 911, decided to throw away all the progress mentioned above, to frighten a people whose government only has 5% of the current troops in the war on terror, and had just decided to pull those troops out? The word stupidity would not cover this decision. It is unfathomable in its illogic.
I understand this raises things we do not want to consider. Well, consider this. In the early 1960’s your government considered operations that would sacrifice innocent, civilian American lives in order to start a war with Cuba. I will not rehash Operation Northwoods (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/) here except to point out that it is horribly naïve to assume people in power, would not seek to abuse that power for their own ends. If this was true in 1962, it is even truer in 2005.
We see the images of terror on the television and we remember our fear, just like we were supposed to. Our President will use this attack to rebuild all he has lost in support and we cannot allow that to happen. This attack does not change the fact that George Bush started his war 6 months prior to obtaining Congressional approval. It does not change the fact that he knowingly lied to Congress to go to war, fitting his intelligence around his policy. It does not change the fact that Karl Rove apparently may have committed treason against the United States. Don’t let him use this tragic event to sway us from pursuing the truth. Don’t let him.
Cui bono America, Cui bono.
Anthony Wade, a contributing writer to opednews.com, is dedicated to educating the populace to the lies and abuses of the government. He is a 37-year-old independent writer from New York with political commentary articles seen on multiple websites. A Christian progressive and professional Rehabilitation Counselor working with the poor and disabled, Mr. Wade believes that you can have faith and hold elected officials accountable for lies and excess.
Anthony Wade’s Archive: http://www.opednews.com/archiveswadeanthony.htm
Email Anthony: takebacktheus@yahoo.com



http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_anthony__050707_cui_bono__stupidity_.htm

I,m doing my best to remain "on the fence" over this one
Back to top
View user's profile 
tzb57rOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 May 2002
Total posts: 137
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 12:30    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Bearing in mind that Blair made this "speech" quite soon after the attack


I think that the speach sounded like cut-and-shunt. A standard "the terrosists shall never win" speach had some references to London tacked on. All he had to do was read over the speach to freshen his memory and hey presto... instant statesman. No conspiracy, just planning by the spin doctors for the inevitable. (It's a bit like the BBC having a large number of Obituary Specials on the shelf for major elderly public figures)

Is it suspicious that when anti-civil libarties legislation is struggling through parliament (terrorism bill -> troops at heathrow, and now the identity cards bill) that something happens to harden public opinion... maybe I'm just too old and cynical that politicians will make hay from other peoples misery.
Back to top
View user's profile 
StormkhanOffline
Disturbingly familiar
Joined: 28 May 2003
Total posts: 3897
Location: Robin Hood country.
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-07-2005 12:43    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perhaps they will be using the outrage as a serendipitous event to push through unpopular legislation on a tide of anger and fear, but then again, politics is rarely 'nice'. To be in politics requires hard decisions, tricky moral dilemmas and the use of circumstances to do your bidding.

I don't agree with it but I can understand it.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 119, 120, 121  Next
Page 1 of 121

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group