Jims02- I think you are right about the food being the oranges. And it could very well be a precurser to Christa's boot. Sad to say, that she wouldn't get the boot if Rupert was still in the game.

But sabatoge and stealing are two different indicators, which could mean that if it was sabatoge, maybe Sandra (cause it would be so like her) gets angry at the others for voting for Rupee and she decides to put sand in the food to make it ineditable.

Enemies for life - what Rupee says to Burton when he gets voted out.

Or -- Jeff tells Jon this after Jon tries to be friends with Jeff and Jeff wanted Jon to know how he REALLY feels about him.

LAST EDITED ON 11-18-03 AT 09:14 AM (EST)

Maybe when Sandra tells Rupert she overheard Jon and Burton planning to vote him off he flies into a rage. Later the fishing spear is found broken thus "sabotaging the food supply" and Rupert gets the blame. But in fact someone else (Jon/Burton?) does it frame Rupert.

Now this would be a brutal and brilliant lie. And it certainly fits everyone's personality to this point. I just can't imagine someone ditching their food source. Perhaps Jon "I can starve for a million" would?

Laurie

Oh, Sexishelly has a devious mind! This scenario would fit perfectly and be perfectly entertaining. We can only hope!

>Remember Ryan O's chat? He
>mentioned there were oranges missing,
>and that Christa was the
>one eating them. Maybe
>it's a different scandal, but
>I've been wondering why it
>wasn't editted in yet.
>
>Second question. Why would they
>withhold this clip until now?
> Because perhaps this is
>Christa's boot episode? Increase
>in face time, and it
>makes the bootee look unfavorable,
>so the audience can say
>"That's why Christa didn't win."

Hmm. Does it make any difference that this clip has been shown in full on Yahoo Platinum? On that service, we see a whole thing play out where oranges are counted and accusations are made; the implication is that Christa is accusing Ryan, though he denies it and later tells the camera that she was probably the one who ate it.

Just wondering if it's habitual for CBS to edit in footage in a later episode that has previously been made available on Platinum.

from http://sites.ninemsn.com.au/minisite/tvshows/survivor.asp

•Christa is accused of sabotaging the food supply. But is it a false accusation?

>"The Great Lie" -- One tribe
>member dupes his fellow castaways
>with one of the most
>shocking lies ever told on
>SURVIVOR,

I am leaning towards Jon because I could see him telling the "great lie" to save his butt from TC. The only other "his" around by this episode would be either Burton or Rupert. Rupert is out in my opinion, he would yell and scream but I can't see him coming up with the greatest lie ever. Burton on the other hand has already admitted he would lie to stay in the game so it could be him, but again do you see the greatest lie ever coming from Burton? It doesn't seem plausible that the liar would be anybody but Jon.

>A heated argument among tribe members
>ends with one castaway claiming
>another to be their sworn
>enemy for life.

This has Rupert written all over it so it gives us Rupert fans hope that he will not be the booted one in the next episode. Although he may get votes and have another screaming session when they get back to camp, and declare his "enemy for life" at that time.

Meanwhile,
>another castaway is accused of
>sabotaging the tribe’s food supply,
>but is it a false
>accusation?

Could this be Rupert as well? Possibly angered over his votes at TC he thinks "I gave them food, I can take it away?" Or did he do it to show them that being hungry is harder then they think and with all their food staples gone (beans, rice, Spam) they need to keep him around to fish.

Despite the tension
>of competition, a touching gesture
>of compassion marks the Reward
>Challenge.

Is this where we suddenly start rooting for Jon as Jeff hinted too earlier? Does he win reward (possibly a family visit) and give it to Lil?

Despite the gesture,
>no one is safe as
>conspiracies and overheard conversations fuel
>the insecurities of every castaway
>left on the island.

I think this is either the Rupert boot episode (with Burton or Christa going in the "Swimming with Sharks" episode) or it will be the moment many of us have waited for and Jon will be gone.
>

LAST EDITED ON 11-18-03 AT 02:03 AM (EST)

If Rupert is gone this week, the only food provider left will be Burton. I can see someone in his alliance "sabotaging" the food on purpose, if only to strengthen Burton's (and thus, his alliance's) position in the tribe.

Perhaps, because of the events of this episode, the "older woman" gets to make her trip back to the market (wasn't that one of the spoilers floating around this season?)

I too think this indicates Ruperts gone and that Burton is now the fish provider.

But, Burton may simply not have as much luck at it as Rupert did leading to accusations that he's failing on purpose.

Rupert got lot's of fish in the cove, Why can't Burton? As folks start to get hungry, they may be willing to believe Burton is failing on purpose, especially if they rationalize to themselves that it was REALLY Burtons idea to get Rid of Rupert.

Pure speculation on my part, but I thought I'd throw it out there just in case I'm not the only one with these ideas...

Okay, the only men left at this point (one of whom could be gone by ep 10, or course) are Rupert, Jon, and Burton. I certainly think the "his" is relevant as they could have very easily said "dupes the other castaways" instead of "dupes his fellow castaways". So, that leaves three possible liars.

My question about Jon being the liar is if we know he's the teller of this monumental lie, what would make us start to root for him, as Jiffy said earlier? If I knew someone had told this enormous lie (and obviously we are going to know about this lie), I'm not sure I'd be rooting for that person, especially if it's a person I already don't like (as I'm sure Jiffy assumes about the general viewing audience). It just doesn't seem "right" that we'd be rooting for Jon if he is the liar UNLESS...

The final three comes down to Burton, Lil, and Jon, as B & L have said they wanted. Obviously, most people would likely be disappointed with this final three (2 outcasts and the least liked survivor of the whole cast, according to polls). Maybe Jiffy's assuming that we are all going to be rooting for Jon rather than the outcasts? That's the ONLY way I see the Jiffy comments being in synch with the "Jon the liar" speculation that abounds.

I suppose the lie could be something so strategically brilliant that we'd want to root for him simply for being so ingenious and playing the game so well, but it seems obvious that the average Survivor viewer is less inclined to root for someone for playing the game well (Rich, Brian) over someone they just like (Lis/Rodger). I just don't imagine Jiffy saying we'd be rooting for him if he's this big liar after he's already at the bottom of our lists in the first place, KWIM?

The 80s are back, like totally!
2003 winner of the coveted "Punky"

Hello,

First time poster...love your message boards by the way, so here goes...

I wanted to throw my 2 cents into this discussion because I think that what was mentioned earlier about "his fellow tribes mates" meaning that the liar would be a man may be incorrect. The reason is that when writing, if you don't know if the person is female or male, you would typically say "he", "his", etc to represent that person. It's one of those grammar rules, so it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a man or woman. It was also discussed earlier that the liar could be Sandra, it very well could be since CBS wouldn't necessarily want to give away the sex of the liar so soon, and want to keep us guessing. In the end, if a million dollars is at stake, anybody could be the liar!

Compassionate gestures? Big Lies?? Sounds like someone is gonna benefit from the lie and someone is gonna feel like an utter ass.

The "compassionate gesture" is almost certainly akin to Matt in S6 "giving up" his visit with a loved one after winning the family visit RC. Maybe it's the one nice thing Jon does while on the islands...right before he gets the axe.

Fester

That would indeed be a shocker and a sympathy gain for Jon.

Not alot let me tell ya, but some

First, welcome to the boards! This truly is a great place to bounce ideas off each other

As for the "his" thing...true, you can say 'his' in place of 'his/hers' or 'the person's' when referring to either gender, but the fact that they could have just as easily said "the other" (or something along those lines) tends to make me think that they ARE alluding to a male liar. Of course, I could be totally wrong and the writer(s) of the article/segment is/are using male pronouns in place of the more commonly used (these days) gender neutral descriptions. Yeah, the liar could be either male or female, but given some of the other information (Jiffy's exclamation of "m_____ f_____") in combination with the use of "his" in this article, leads me to believe the liar is male. I actually wasn't all that convinced of the MF expression meaning the liar was male (I mean, the expression is not exclusive to describing/referring to men or anything), but when paired with this, it is much more convincing (IMO, of course).

Again, welcome to Blows! Hope you enjoy yourself here! It's a great community (thanks Webby!)

The 80s are back, like totally!
2003 winner of the coveted "Punky"

>I actually wasn't all that convinced of the
>MF expression meaning the liar was male (I
>mean, the expression is not exclusive to
>describing/referring to men or anything),
>but when paired with this, it is much more
>convincing (IMO, of course).

My take on Jiffy dropping the F-bomb is that it's totally gender irrelevant. I don't think he was calling the person who told the lie an MF....I think it was just an expression of suprise and shock...much like someone would say "Holy Sh***!!"

As for the his thing.....It just goes to show you how far people are willing to go to dissect everything that MB and company put out. Common grammatical rules state that you would use 'his' in this case to refer to either gender (especially if you don't know the gender)...but the people here immediately assume it means that it's a male who tells the lie.

But, look at the other option. If they said "duped their fellow tribemates" instead of "his fellow tribemates", everyone would assume it was a woman, since they didn't say "his." They would say "since they said 'their' fellow tribemates, it must be a female who tells the lie.

Isn't this fun? ;)

Monte

Welcome to the boards, Oddglass! Feel free to throw your two cents in at any time, The more the merrier, as they say. (Especially if you intend to throw money.)

The reason I think the "his" is significant is because I believe who ever wrote this blurb does know who tells the lie. They could have masked the gender by avoiding a pronoun.
Writing "dupes the other castaways" makes the same point as "dupes his fellow tribemates." In my mind, it would add just a little bit more mystery to the situation.
Whoever wrote this blurb didn't consider masking the gender, because 90 percent of the viewers don't even know the lie is coming. And the folks at SeeBS don't really care about the spoiling community, since it is such a small percentage of the fan base.
I don't think this is a monumental moment in Survivor history, but speculation about the lie and the liar has generated about a thousand posts. So forgive me if I cling to any shred of logic.

On another matter, the earlier speculation about Sandra was not that she is the liar, but that she declares someone a sworn enemy for life. Originally I said that could only be The Dread Pirate Rupert. As I have been so cleverly reminded, it could easily be Sandra Diaz-Inigo-Montoya-Twine.

Have fun stormin' da castle!