I think that's why it got put into play this week. They knew BB6 can't keep winning HOH. Erika, George, Danielle and Marci aren't "popular" players (hence the trashing of Marci on national TV last night). CBS likes the Will-Janey subplot and may not want it to end too early. Who cares if Erika leaves? The BB6 vs. James is good for ratings.

Marcellas deserved that trashing and more.
His behind the back namecalling of people who treat hi as a friend has been disgusting.
I am surprised they showed some of it, but glad.

I thought that they were going to reveal the Coup d'Etat on next Thursday's show, meaning it would begin after Janelle whoever's evicted... I could be wrong though.

Whatever it is, it probably won't come into play until after the nominations. It would be really stupid to have someone overthrow the HOH right before they've done anything. In that case, it would make the HOH comp pointless. I'm guessing it might come sometime between Nominations and POV Competition.

In that case, it would make the HOH comp pointless.

And when was the last time BB made something pointless?

Oh, wait...

...Like any Final Four nomination ceremony?

Robert: "I'm nominating Jun and Alison for eviction, so that my sweetie Erika can vote one of them off. Unless of course, one of them wins POV, in which case we're screwed. But what are the odds of that happening?"

I was reading some of the discussion on this over on jokers, IMO on Thursday could be a just before the live vote thing so could be in play this week.

They could also do the competition ahead of time but not play out the coup until the live show, and then proceed with the live vote without anyone having time to plot and scheme over the new nominations.

LAST EDITED ON 08-04-06 AT 08:10 PM (EST)

1. They've done scavenger hunt-type competitions before, so it wouldn't surprise me.... but it's probably gonna be standard fare: Quiz, physical challenge or endurance challenge. They better let the HoH compete or it's a (pratically) guaranteed coup every.single.time. Furthemore, you'll see more people tank the HoH comps just so they can compete in the coup comps. (and since the HoH comps are usually the only one live....... that could leave a mark on the ratings since it would be pointless.......)

2. Once to three times a season, probably, or else like TAR's Fast Forwards and Yields it loses it's importance otherwise......

3. If they do the contest before HoH, the window for the coup probably opens up after nominations. Of course, I also wonder if the coup "dagger" or whatever it's gonna be is good for only one week or until desired......

4. If the coup's new HoH doesn't have any influence on the nominations and can't put the old HoH on the chop block (if desired..... (probably but you never know.....)) then what's the fricken point of having it???????

5. This one better be good or even Dr. Will might not be able to save this patient.......

A gift from Cygnus!

My theory is that it will happen after noms but before the veto ceremony, allowing the new HOH to chose the new nominee if the veto is used. Right now Will wouldn't use the veto, but he might if Boogie was suddenly HOH. New HOH would get to break ties too, which might end this unanimous eviction for the harmony of the house carp.

LAST EDITED ON 08-05-06 AT 02:28 PM (EST)

Thanks to another board's posting I found this:

"But first houseguests just to show how dangerous a web can be, we are going to raise this competition to a whole new level. They are trying to hang on to win HOH but the Houseguests are about to get hit with a big surprise. Stay with us.

Who will be the new head of household? Find out Sunday at eight when the winner will be revealed. Plus see who the HOH nominates for eviction. Then Tuesday at eight who will win the power of veto and how will it affect the two nominees?

"And I will be back one week from tonight for the next live vote and eviction. Plus in a Big Brother first we will introduce the Coup d’ Etat. This new twist will enable one person to overthrow the HOH at a moment’s notice."

So, it seems the coup will be for the following week not this week.

Edited to seperate the portion about the coup.

>
>So, it seems the coup will
>be for the following week
>not this week.
>

Thx very much for that! What a lousy reason to wish the summer away! But I really can't wait!

I watched Thursday's episode again this morning (while the hamsters were sleeping) and yes, that is the language Julie used.

But, (and it's a big one) she was vague about when it would be introduced. Why would they announce a twist like that a full week before they put it into effect? And telling us about it now, but waiting a week to tell the hamsters doesn't make sense because it wouldn't make any sense to overthrow the HOH immediately after the competition. (at least not to me )

I interpreted it as Julie telling us what would happen during the week and the Coup D'Etat was one of those things. (not to mention that, strictly speaking, she announced it on Thursday, and if it happens anytime between Sunday's show and Thursday, it would happen 'next week' from the time she announced it.)

From the sound of what she said it doesn't have to be used immediately after the competition. It sounds like it is something that someone may be able to hold on to and use when they want. They may not even be required to use it in that first week.

Perhaps it will be something like the Hidden Immunity Idol in Survivor: no one is quite sure who has it or when it could be used.

A tribephyl original

>Perhaps it will be something like the Hidden Immunity Idol in
>Survivor: no one is quite sure who has it or when it could be used.

This is what I think too.

>Perhaps it will be something like the Hidden Immunity Idol in
>Survivor: no one is quite sure who has it or when it could be used.

I never thought of this but that would be a good idea.

normally in a coup you get rid of the leader, so I wonder if that means the HOH would be evicted?

I found this info about the coup d'etat from its uses in history maybe be used somehow the same way in the BB house.

1.Tactically, a coup usually involves control of some active portion of the military while neutralizing the remainder of a country's armed services. This active group captures or expels leaders, seizes physical control of important government offices, means of communication, and the physical infrastructure, such as streets and power plants. The coup succeeds if its opponents fail to dislodge the plotters, allowing them to consolidate their position, obtain the surrender or acquiescence of the populace and surviving armed forces, and claim legitimacy.

2. Coups typically use the power of the existing government for its own takeover. As Edward Luttwak remarks in his Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook: "A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder." In this sense, use of military or other organized force is not the defining feature of a coup d'état.

3. In recent years, the traditional military coup has declined. The more usual form of military intervention, which some regard as coups d'état, uses the threat of military force to remove a vulnerable or unpopular leader. In contrast to straight coups d'état, the military does not directly assume power, but rather installs civilian leaders it finds more palatable. One advantage of this tactic is the appearance of greater legitmacy.

Types of coups

1. Breakthrough coups: In which a revolutionary army overthrows a traditional government and creates a new bureaucratic elite. Breakthrough coups are generally led by non-commissioned officers (NCOs) or junior officers and only happen once. Examples include China in 1911, Egypt in 1952, Greece in 1967,Bulgaria in 1944 and Liberia in 1980.

2. Guardian coups: These coups have been described as musical chairs. The stated aim of this form of coup is to improve public order, efficiency, or to end corruption. There is usually no fundamental shift in the structure of power, and the leaders of these types of coups generally portray their actions as a temporary and unfortunate necessity. One of the early examples of this is the coup by Sulla in 88 BCE which displaced the elected leadership of Marius in Rome. Many nations with guardian coups undergo many shifts between civilian and military governments. Examples include Pakistan, Turkey, and Thailand.

3. Veto coups: These coups occur when the army vetoes mass participation and social mobilization. In these cases the army must confront and suppress large-scale and broad-based opposition and as a result they tend to be repressive and bloody. Examples include Chile in 1973 and Argentina in 1976. An abortive and botched veto coup occurred in Venezuela in 2002.

Coups can also be classified by the level of the military that leads the coup. Veto coups and guardian coups tend to be led by senior officers. Breakthrough coups tend to be led by junior officers or NCOs. In cases where the coup is led by junior officers or enlisted men, the coup is also a mutiny which can have grave implications for the organizational structure of the military.

There is also a category known as bloodless coups in which the mere threat of violence is enough to force the current government to step aside. Bloodless coups are so called because they involve no violence and thus no bloodshed. Napoleon's 18 Brumaire coup is often pointed out as an example of bloodless coup, showing that bloodless coups are not always considered to be "bloodless": on 18 Brumaire, several members of parliament were thrown out the windows of the building where they assembled. More recently, Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan came to power in a bloodless coup in 1999.

The term self-coup is used when the current government assumes extraordinary powers not allowed by the legislation. A historical example is the actions of then President and later French Emperor Louis Napoléon Bonaparte in 1851 against the powerful National Assembly; while a most modern example is Alberto Fujimori in Peru, who was democratically elected, but later took control of the legislative and judicial powers. Some argue that the assumption of "emergency powers" by King Gyanendra of Nepal is a self-coup.

i know this is boring stuff but might make sence when figuring out what CBS will do with it. I am a ball of usless information

>I found this info about the
>coup d'etat from its uses
>in history maybe be used
>somehow the same way in
>the BB house.
>
>1.Tactically, a coup usually involves control
>of some active portion of
>the military while neutralizing the
>remainder of a country's armed
>services. This active group captures
>or expels leaders, seizes physical
>control of important government offices,
>means of communication, and the
>physical infrastructure, such as streets
>and power plants. The coup
>succeeds if its opponents fail
>to dislodge the plotters, allowing
>them to consolidate their position,
>obtain the surrender or acquiescence
>of the populace and surviving
>armed forces, and claim legitimacy.
>
>
>
>2. Coups typically use the power
>of the existing government for
>its own takeover. As Edward
>Luttwak remarks in his Coup
>d'État: A Practical Handbook: "A
>coup consists of the infiltration
>of a small but critical
>segment of the state apparatus,
>which is then used to
>displace the government from its
>control of the remainder." In
>this sense, use of military
>or other organized force is
>not the defining feature of
>a coup d'état.
>
>3. In recent years, the traditional
>military coup has declined. The
>more usual form of military
>intervention, which some regard as
>coups d'état, uses the threat
>of military force to remove
>a vulnerable or unpopular leader.
>In contrast to straight coups
>d'état, the military does not
>directly assume power, but rather
>installs civilian leaders it finds
>more palatable. One advantage of
>this tactic is the appearance
>of greater legitmacy.
>
>Types of coups
>
>1. Breakthrough coups: In which a
>revolutionary army overthrows a traditional
>government and creates a new
>bureaucratic elite. Breakthrough coups are
>generally led by non-commissioned officers
>(NCOs) or junior officers and
>only happen once. Examples include
>China in 1911, Egypt in
>1952, Greece in 1967,Bulgaria in
>1944 and Liberia in 1980.
>
>
>2. Guardian coups: These coups have
>been described as musical chairs.
>The stated aim of this
>form of coup is to
>improve public order, efficiency, or
>to end corruption. There is
>usually no fundamental shift in
>the structure of power, and
>the leaders of these types
>of coups generally portray their
>actions as a temporary and
>unfortunate necessity. One of the
>early examples of this is
>the coup by Sulla in
>88 BCE which displaced the
>elected leadership of Marius in
>Rome. Many nations with guardian
>coups undergo many shifts between
>civilian and military governments. Examples
>include Pakistan, Turkey, and Thailand.
>
>
>3. Veto coups: These coups occur
>when the army vetoes mass
>participation and social mobilization. In
>these cases the army must
>confront and suppress large-scale and
>broad-based opposition and as a
>result they tend to be
>repressive and bloody. Examples include
>Chile in 1973 and Argentina
>in 1976. An abortive and
>botched veto coup occurred in
>Venezuela in 2002.
>
>Coups can also be classified by
>the level of the military
>that leads the coup. Veto
>coups and guardian coups tend
>to be led by senior
>officers. Breakthrough coups tend to
>be led by junior officers
>or NCOs. In cases where
>the coup is led by
>junior officers or enlisted men,
>the coup is also a
>mutiny which can have grave
>implications for the organizational structure
>of the military.
>
>There is also a category known
>as bloodless coups in which
>the mere threat of violence
>is enough to force the
>current government to step aside.
>Bloodless coups are so called
>because they involve no violence
>and thus no bloodshed. Napoleon's
>18 Brumaire coup is often
>pointed out as an example
>of bloodless coup, showing that
>bloodless coups are not always
>considered to be "bloodless": on
>18 Brumaire, several members of
>parliament were thrown out the
>windows of the building where
>they assembled. More recently, Pervez
>Musharraf of Pakistan came to
>power in a bloodless coup
>in 1999.
>
>The term self-coup is used when
>the current government assumes extraordinary
>powers not allowed by the
>legislation. A historical example is
>the actions of then President
>and later French Emperor Louis
>Napoléon Bonaparte in 1851 against
>the powerful National Assembly; while
>a most modern example is
>Alberto Fujimori in Peru, who
>was democratically elected, but later
>took control of the legislative
>and judicial powers. Some argue
>that the assumption of "emergency
>powers" by King Gyanendra of
>Nepal is a self-coup.
>
>
>i know this is boring stuff
>but might make sence when
>figuring out what CBS will
>do with it. I am
>a ball of usless information
>
>
>
>

Hmmmmmmmm......I wonder if the blast from the past (previous house guests) that are expected to be in the house on Thurs, Sun, and Tues might be part of the coup????????

These past guests could be involved in any of the types of coup you listed.

LAST EDITED ON 08-09-06 AT 00:29 AM (EST)

This was just on realitybbq,

Someone IS Coming Back... But Who? And... Advertisers Hate Ratings

Neither the HG who were not voted into the house nor those who have been evicted from the house have been sequestered... but apparently someone IS coming back to stay in the house for a period of time, longer than just a competition. Rumour on the net says it will happen this Thursday and may have to do with the Coup d'Etat, but the little birdies aren't sure when it is going to happen. We don't know who's going in either... time will tell!

On another note, advertisers are NOT pleased about the low ratings BB is getting this year. Look for more product placements ON the show itself to try to apease them. Double thick cookies anyone?

One advertiser, Sunoco, has already pulled their advertising bucks - that's why the label was mostly covered (you could still tell it was Sunoco) on the gas can in the lux comp.

Hmmmmmm.... Thoughts?

My thought is that the evicted houseguests along with the ones who were not voted into the house will be brought to the studio, imediately after the HOH competition the Houseguests will be told about the twist, they will have to vote on one of the Houseguests outside the house in, they will replace the new HOH and the new HOH will be imediately evicted.

Hmm... Interesting theory. I just don't think this would be fair. Whoever is voted back has not been sequestered and have probably seen the show/live feeds. This person would possess more information than any of the other hamsters and give them an unfair advantage. I would much rather see Danielle being overthrown this week, then the new HOH. Unless the new HOH happens to be James. =)

Do you think the peeps they show in the holograms will be back in. If so its not fair cause they show Bunky (can't stand him) and he has been wise to everything.

I don't think it's fair to put Bunky or anyone else who hasn't been sequestered back into the house. But, if BB wants a twist, this would definitelly twist everyone's strategy from this point forward. Maybe allowing the new hamsters to be aware of the game is a way to catch them up to speed with everything that's going on in the house. If they went in blindly, they would probably be evicted immediatelly. By posessing all the knowledge, they would be able to shake everything up, re-shape the game, new alliances would need to be made.

I'm also not entirely sure that it was Bunky in that picture. I read somewhere on these boards that Scott (BB5) would go into the house unexpectedly. Does anyone think that the man in the hollogram looks like Scott? And, does the woman in the hollogram look like Nicole (BB2)? I definitelly don't think the "ghosts" are Allison or Jase. These could be past hamsters that were not among the original line-up eligible to be voted back into the house. If that's the case, maybe "the ghosts" were sequestered and will materialize on Thurs as part of the Coup twist.

I "borrowed" this from TVClubhouse who borrowed it from RealityBBQ

Former Big Brother Houseguests will Return to Participate in this Week's Head of Household Competition, Food Competition and Veto Competition

BROTHER: ALL-STARS" TREATED TO A BLAST FROM THE PAST

Former Big Brother Houseguests will Return to Participate in this Week's Head of Household Competition, Food Competition and Veto Competition

Julie Chen Will Announce Details for this Season's Newest Twist,
the "Coup d'Etat" on Thursday, Aug. 10

The remaining Houseguests competing on this season of BIG BROTHER: ALL-STARS will be treated to some familiar faces this week as several former Houseguests lend their services to this week's Head of Household competition on Thursday, Aug. 10, the Food Competition on Sunday, Aug. 13 and the Veto Competition on Tuesday, Aug. 15.

The first group of former BIG BROTHER Houseguests will return for a surprise cameo appearance this Thursday, Aug. 10 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT) during the live eviction show. The former Houseguests will be incorporated into the HOH competition, which will require this season's All Stars to recall specific clues they have received from the former Houseguests throughout the week in order to be crowned this week's HOH. Another group of former Houseguests will return to serve as judges during this week's Food Competition on Sunday, Aug. 13 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT). The BIG BROTHER blast from the past week will conclude with former Houseguests also playing a role in the all important Veto Competition on Tuesday, Aug. 15 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT).

During the Live broadcast on Thursday, Aug. 10 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT), host Julie Chen will explain this season's newest twist, the "Coup d'Etat," which she teased at the end of last week's live eviction show. The "Coup d'Etat" will enable one person to overthrow the HOH at a moment's notice.

Folks, it ain't about being "fair", it's about juicing up ratings that suck.

As for the "Blasts from the Past", just another way to involved former hamsters that weren't vote in.