WordWolf

Since you asked, here's how I see it. There are precisely 2 possibilities. A) Snape is a Death Eater and pretending to work for the OotP as a spy on the DEs. B) Snape is an OotP member and pretending to work for the DEs as a spy on the OotP. ===== ALL evidence must fit both or one. All evidence fitting both must be DISCARDED when looking for which one is correct. All evidence fitting BOTH are due to his attempting to pretend to serve one side while actually serving the other. ==== In Book 5, Harry (caught by Umbridge and her Inquisitoria Squad) tells Snape "He's got Padfoot in the place where it's hidden!" Snape pretends Harry said nothing of consequence. Then the OotP arrived at the Dept of Mysteries, outracing the MoM there. Only Harry-and anyone whom he told-knew about that. That means everyone present when Harry told Sirius, and anyone he encountered after, could have known. All members of the D.A. Club (Defense Association/Dumbledore's Army) who knew proceeded to the Dept of Mysteries WITH Harry. All standard communication available to students was being monitored. (That's why Harry was CAUGHT trying to circumvent them in the first place.) Therefore, the OotP was not notified by Floo or Owl Post. Anyone travelling by broom would have been conspicuous AND probably taken too long. Apparition was possible. HOWEVER, it was limited to: A) "adults"-anyone old enough to take the classes B) anyone OFF HOGWARTS GROUNDS. Apparition is not possible on Hogwarts grounds for any wizard. (House-elves use a different form and CAN go.) So, an adult would have to travel to Hogsmeade, THEN Apparate. Sending a house-elf would be limited to Dobby-who, so far, has ONLY been given standing orders ONCE by Dumbledore, and specific orders from Harry. I also expect Harry's instructions only apply so long as Dobby can still work for Dumbledore- which suggests he can only "do stuff" on Hogwarts grounds. All of that means that it is far to "iffy" for someone else to have used Dobby this time. Not impossible- revisit this if all more likely possibilities are exhausted. That allows for 2 more methods of communication. A) mirrors like Harry and Sirius had. No evidence exists that ANYONE else had a matched pair. Not impossible, but unlikely. Again, only consider if more likely possibilities exist. B) OotP Patronus messages. That would work, and requires the skill to send one, and a wand. OotP members, AFAIK, are the only ones who know how to use a Patronus in this fashion. So, the only real suspect on who tipped off the OotP- correct me if I left out any other possibilities- is Snape. So, could Snape's warning serve the OotP? Obviously. Do you really need me to type it all out? Could Snape's warning serve the DEs? Well, it was the ONLY reason the OotP arrived. If they had NOT, the MoM would have been the first on the scene, and they would only arrive TOO LATE-as they did, or even LATER-if the OotP/DE FIGHT brought them. So, for it to serve the DEs, it would have to be in their interests for the OotP to arrive. That wasn't the case. The DEs faced some brave members of the DA Club. They put up a good fight, but, even underestimated, could only delay the DEs from their goal-obtaining The Prophecy. If the OotP had not arrived, the DEs would have left with The Prophecy, and probably taken one or more hostages from the DA Club, certainly HARRY, probably NEVILLE (for Bellatrix's amusement.) So, the OotP spoiled the DEs' plans. So, if I understand correctly, the only person who could have tipped off the OotP was SNAPE, and the warning benefitted the OotP but not the DEs. ONLY Snape (and the Golden Trio-Harry, Hermione, Ron, maybe Ginny) would know who sent the warning- so it could not have gotten back to the DE's. So, Snape sent a warning that benefitted the OotP and crushed a critical DE mission, in a way that the DEs could not trace back to him. Sounds like Snape is a spy FOR the OotP, trying very hard not to "break his cover" with the DEs.

Raf already guessed "K-Pax". Was that a miss? I thought it was "K-Pax" also..... (But he'd already guessed it...)

They have to do that??!!? Actually, that particular practice was Rozilla's brainchild. It started with her dept back when, under her "capable leadership."

Psst. Pirate? You're up....

"Why do you attack us?" "Why not?" This place is a lunatic asylum."

"Tell me more about this man 'Houdini'."

That's Back to the Future. I think that's Marty towards the beginning of the movie.

Ok, I think this is a potentially-productive question. I honestly believe there are less-offensive and more-offensive ways to say anything. How would I have expressed the same type of sentiment as the posts that started trouble? Well, I run the risk of changing his meaning if he really meant exactly what he said originally. However, taking as a given that he was absolutely truthful that NO insult was meant, and that no judgements were intended of other posters at the GSC, I offer this before-and-after.... ================ Before: "Yes. I spent some time looking through the first one at least until I could not stomach anymore. The spiritual kingdom does not hold any fascination over me, I am well aware of their motives. So while wee ones anxiously wait for the wee hours when a fictional tale of a wee wizard will be released. I'll be waiting also, for the risen Son of God to return." After: "Yes. I spent a short time reading part of the first one. I put it down soon after- I was getting physically ill. To me, it had the feel of spiritualism. I steer well clear of anything that feels like spiritualism to me. Some kids are eager for the next HP book. Me, I'd rather save all my anticipation for the return of the risen Son of God." ===== There. The difference? I still say I read an excerpt. I still stop reading. I still stop because I evaluate it as having a spiritualist tinge-but I don't declare that dissenters are automatically wrong by declaring this book is the result of "the spiritual kingdom", period. I also object to kids waiting for HP, contrast it with waiting for the Messiah- who is FAR more important than any fiction-but allow for the possibility that people who are eager for HP books might also be eager for the Messiah. Therefore, I suggest I'm a good Christian, but allow for the possibility that HP fans might be good Christians as well. The absence of allowing for this was my main objection.

Joey Pantoliano Daredevil Colin Farrell

I looked it up before, since I was sure I didn't know the song. I was right-I never heard the real lyrics to it. Pirate, that's the song. You're up.

WhiteDove, I read your posts, and re-read them. You may not have INTENDED to give an impression of being judgemental. However, that was the substance of what you posted. Here's what Raf concluded about your posts earlier in this thread, which you claim were innocent statements of opinion... Please note that Raf makes his living evaluating and composing the printed word. I'd be slow to accuse him of misunderstanding what was WRITTEN just because it disagrees with what was MEANT. This is beating a dead horse at this time, so I won't push this any farther- unless you feel a need to and I'm inclined to go along. It seems obvious to me that you refuse to see the slant in what you posted, and insist what you MEANT is ALL you posted. Invoking child molestation, the dumbing down of society, and charges of spiritual malfeasance invokes BIAS and LOADED STATEMENTS. "I didnt mean anything personal when I drew a connection between Harry Potter and books glorifying child molestation" looks like a non-sensical when written that way. However, you drew that connection (7/20/05, 2:47pm, page 1, this thread, moved from the other thread and deleted from there), and have said that you didn't mean anything personal. I hope nobody's relying on your ability to communicate PRECISELY what you mean. Either you MEANT this and are lying, or you DIDN'T mean this and have a knack for finding loaded language-ways to make what should be innocent statements. Either way, I'd seek better communication.

It always sounded interesting, but I never played in one. I HAVE, however, done a considerable amount of LARPing. That's Live Action Role Playing. They have some things in common, so preparation for both is similar. (Technically, the Murder Mystery Party IS a form of LARP but is not usually called that.) I found some links you might want to review. Basically, you'll want to read anything about preparing the game area, costuming, and troubleshooting. If you have specific questions related to any of these, you can direct them to me. Anything else I wouldn't be able to answer. Here's the site all the links connect to: http://www.skaro.com/larpdex.html

WhiteDove, that was true, but not the WHOLE TRUTH. BTW, please break up the quotes visually in some way so we can see where you are speaking, and where someone else is speaking. I broke it up above so people can see what claim you're currently making. I added the dates/times to the quotes as well. Now, as to my claim about the WHOLE TRUTH. You claimed you played nice until someone else took a cheap shot. Here's the order: WhiteDove: (7/19/05, 2:54pm) That's not an insult. Rascal: (7/19/05, 3:03pm) That's not an insult. Raf: (7/19/05, 3:08pm Eastern) That's not an insult. WhiteDove: (7/19/05, 3:56pm Eastern) THAT was the comment that prompted the other responses. Rascal: (7/19/05, 4:12pm) That wasn't an insult, but a polite disagreement. Raf: (7/19/05, 4:56pm) That was another disagreement, quite civil. Considering you basically had said "Well, I'll be a good Christian, but all of you who enjoy Harry Potter and await the 6th book are NOT good Christians,", I thought that was quite a polite response. THEN Belle made the comment you objected to. Her reply was not to your initial post- WHICH NO ONE OBJECTED TO- but to your followup post that had an accusation in it. So, I looked it up, WhiteDove, and YOU posted the first insult, although you phrased it in a less-obvious way than just saying "you're spiritually negligent and irresponsible", which was the substance of your reply. And, as we see, Belle was right-just saying you disagreed was fine. The only real response to you after that was "Did you read the books? You might like them if you read them." Do you see the difference NOW? I'm sure everyone else does....

Personally, I had heard specific complaints about the Harry Potter books, so I didn't read them, and had no interest in the first movie. When the first movie made it to tv, I looked it over, and kept looking for the issues that had been raised (supposed insults on normal humans, teaching kids to be disrespectful, etc.) I was unable to find them. I thus concluded that the complaints were manufactured and without merit, and the first movie wasn't a DIY for Satanism. On the recommendation of 2 Christians, I picked up the first four books and read them in succession. It was in that period I became a fan. I find them an entertaining read and grist for interesting discussions.

Salma Hayek Fools Rush In Matthew Perry

Most websites are run by people who think that. However, each seems to have had errors at different points. For example, Mugglenet had (and still does, unless they changed it) the excerpt JKR posted from Book 6, and says it is a description of the Half-Blood Prince. I don't think it's much of a spoiler to say Scrimgeour isn't the HBP. So, their opinion is not binding on JKR. (Neither is mine.) To have done so with the Avada Kedavra-like Cedric Diggory-would have been MUCH more effective at this and left no ambiguity. It would have had a LOT more pathos. Or, it's yet another time that appearances were deceiving. Death being definitive is the case for James and Lily, Cedric Diggory, and the fatalities in Book 6. It was NOT definitive, so far, for Voldy and Wormtail... because they weren't actually killed off. Please use the direct quote. JKR has previously said that rumours were often very false because they mixed what she said, what someone thought she said, and something unrelated. Thus, third-hand reports are unreliable. JKR said that she established that if you are "properly dead" in the story, then you're dead. The question, therefore, is whether or not the Veil/Arch counts as a "proper death". Some say no, many say yes. Please note that Voldemort and Wormtail were considered apparently dead when Harry was 1 year old. One's body was destroyed, the other supposedly was destroyed except for a finger. Barty Crouch Jr was even BURIED and he was alive. I can run a list of the things confirming that one. We had everything but a coroner's report. All the events in Book 6 can be interpreted as Snape being good OR evil. The event that indicates his allegiance is at the end of Book 5. Snape is the one that sends the OotP to the MoM. If not for that, Voldy would have gotten his hands on the Prophecy AND Harry. All Snape would have had to do was sit on his hands, and things would have suited Voldemort's plans.

I know the account you're referring to, but are you certain that is the same veil? Who said it was the SAME VEIL? I said it FORESHADOWED Book 5. That veil was physical, the connection is symbolic. Nick and the other characters think Sirius "moved on." They also had the same impression of Peter Pettigrew for 12 years. Might they be mistaken yet again? I think they may have SOME knowledge, but not MOST of a person's knowledge. It is possible for someone to give advice and evaluate based on their own personality and character, without any access to experience or extensive knowledge on a subject. If you can find one place a portrait told Dumbledore some obscure piece of information, I shall concede the issue. Until then...no.

One recent comic had Dick Grayson recounting an incident. "You said it yourself...there are some days you just can't get rid of a bomb." I cracked up, posted it to a comics board, and waited for replies. One came back immediately: "*ing Salvation Army!!!" ================= Hiway29, of course, is correct. My next quote would have been "Be careful, every one of these boys has a mother." You'd be surprised how many quotable lines are from that movie.

"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."

While that question has been raised, WhiteDove, I'd like to add another. Since it's related, you can address it at the same time. What do you consider entertainment for those under 18 which is NOT "contributing to the dumbing-down of society and increasing Satan's power?" Is there any, or do you recommend a pure, intainted diet of Scripture only interspersed with time spent in an unadorned white room in order to avoid the near occasion of sin?

Hm. If that Sidney is Sydney, then I think I've heard both quotes. Since I never saw the third, that would make this Scream 2.

According to JKR, http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=103 "Wizards have ways of making sure their voices are heard after their death- think of Bertha Jorkins rising out of the Pensieve in 'Goblet of Fire', the Sorting Hat continuing to spout the wisdom of the Founders hundreds of years after their deaths, the ghosts walking around Hogwarts, the portraits of dead headmasters and mistresses in Dumbledore's office, not to mention Mrs. Black's portrait in number 12, Grimmauld Place...there are other examples, too, of which the Marauder's Map is merely one. It is not really Prongs writing the insult to Snape, it is as though he left a magical recording of his voice within the map." As I understand it, the portraits are like computer programs simulating the former headmasters/mistresses. I doubt they have all the KNOWLEDGE of the person, just all their PERSONALITY. === Lupin was sure? I don't care. Lupin does not work in the Department of MYSTERIES, where they STUDY the Veil/Arch. They STUDY it because THEY don't understand it, and THEY don't know everything about it either (otherwise it would no longer be STUDIED.) The only Unspeakable in the Order of the Phoenix was Bode, and he was killed before Sirius was, so he could not give us an answer. Outside the Dept of Mysteries, only Voldy was said to know Death magic. So, Lupin would not know, Dumbledore would not know. Dumbledore is supposed to know just about everything, but he has made more than a few mistakes. Book 1. All the teachers are trustworthy, including Quirrell. Book 2. Lockheart is competent. Book 3. Pettigrew's been dead for a dozen years, killed by Sirius Black. Book 4. New professor is constantly vigilant. Book 5. No comment. So, what the characters "know" is not guaranteed to be true.

WW - How was this foreshadowed at the party... I forget? For the sake of a friend, Harry passes thru a heavy veil to interact with the dead. (The Golden Trio are the only living people there.) Harry returns unharmed. Harry asked Nick about GHOSTS. I agree with Nick-Sirius will not become a GHOST. In Egyptian mythology-where Isis' veil is connected with dead- the star Sirius leaves and returns. The mirror.... According to JKR, http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=22 "The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You'll have to read the final books to understand that!" The mirror did NOT appear in Book 6, therefore it "will help more than you think." A broken mirror has come in handy in mythology, apparently, in retrieving a soul. If not, the mirror served NO purpose in the story.

And, in keeping with my last link, I present this one. I only remember George Lazenby for one movie.... On Her Majesty's Secret Service Telly Savalas Cannonball Run II

Too easy? Correct. Your turn.