who owns the wand??

I don't remember that part. Where did it say that Grindelwald never owned the elder wand?

Fawkes did NEITHER. He left the night Dumbledore died. It was Dumbledore's patronus or something that flew out of the grave.

you dont have to kill to own the wand,it just has a bloody history and people were willing to kill for its' ownership. malfoy disarmed dumbledore, grindelwald stole it from gregorovitch and then harry stole it from malfoy so it passed along.

i know i read somewhere that Grindelwald did not possesed the wand.. i'll search
it was something to do with Grindelwald only stealing the wand, but not fighting for it

That makes sense. He didn't win it, he just stole it. That would make it easier for Dumbledore to win it from him.

No, it doesn't. To truly own it, Dumbledore would have to win it from the true master of the wand, which you say was Gregorovitch. Dumbledore never had a reason to take on Gregorovitch.

And Gregorovitch was just a little 'ole wand maker. How could he have won it from whoever was it's master before that?

Nope. We're back to T.I.R.A.D.E. The whole book just contradicts itself every which way. Did I mention that it makes the whole series trash?

The wand chooses who to be loyal if the wand is stolen it may choose to be loyal to someone or it may choose to be unloyal and work but not very well. People who say that DH contrdicts itself lack the inteligence to to listen to reason and they do not ask questions to help unfog their understanding.

So, enlighten us, oh wise one.
Say something intelligent for a change, instead of insulting.
It's very transparent.

I, for one, AM asking questions. I want to believe.
Unfortunately, every coherent answer sends me running back to T.I.R.A.D.E.

That's exactly why I disliked the seventh book. The others all seemed to make sense, or at least promised to. They left us with unanswered questions. In the last book, it turned out to be a lie all along. We now know that JKR was always self-contradictory. We just didn't have all of the pieces until now.

I think that all of those pointless deaths were just her way of covering up all the other blunders. She made a mess of it and didn't want to be bothered with cleaning it up. She could have, but it would have required more work.
I don't see it that way. Whether we liked the scene or not, at least it made sense. The logic was there. The pieces fit together.

Ok ask some questions, what do you want to know. And Fawkes seems to come out of no where when ever he showsup. We do not have enough background info on Dumbledore's and Fawkes's relationship.