Harry in NEWT Potions Class? (Was: Is Snape confident?)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 87665

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Blair" <SnapesSlytherin at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" 
> <dumbledore11214 at y...> wrote:
> I'm not even gonna comment.  I must try to be nicer.  I'd like to 
> stay on this list.

No? Why not? :o) I am not going to be offended if you'll attack my 
argument, only if you decide to attack me personally. :o)

I think fairness should go both sides. Snape is one of my favourites 
in the books, but he is also the character, which I sadistically 
enjoy picking up on. :o)

Be fair, doesn't Snape refusal to teach Harry's occlumency sounds a 
little bit suspicious to you?
As I said earlier although I understand why Harry went into pensieve, 
I also think that he was very wrong to do so.

So, Snape is a member of the Order, supposedly an honest and trusted 
one. He knows what kind of risks they may run into with Harry's mind 
open to Voldemort influence and he still can't get over his old 
hurts. Despite supposedly being a superb occlumence, he could not 
control his emotions. They got the best of him. don't you think that 
it may be foreshadowing of his future?

You know, I disagree with the previous poster's choice of words 
rather strongly, but if you ask for fairness, I'd like to see some 
fairness from Snape apologists too. :o)

For example, I was staring at my computer with disbelief, when I read 
somebody's post (I think it was Pip, if not, I apologise) that Snape 
was less at fault for Sirius' death than Harry was.
If you tell me that you agree with this statement, I would say that 
you are not being fair either.

> The comment I was replying to was "protecting students".  Since 
there 
> is no danger of me being cursed off my broom, I used the only thing 
I 
> could concievably be in danger of.

Was Snape in danger of failing of the broom instead of Harry? He was 
doing his job.
 
> How do we decide who's rule breaking is allowed and who's is not? 

I'd say those who are fighting Lordthingy should be allowed to do 
so. :o)

 > No one else agreed with me either.  How does everyone else 
> define "child"?  Is it just by age?  To me, a child is someone who 
> doesn't understand what is going on around them, cannot do anything 
> about it, and refuses to do anything about it.  Harry was a child 
> when it started, he hadn't fought anyone.  Child is a relative 
term.  
> I stand by what I think even if you all seem to think I'm stupid 
for 
> thinking it -- I'll deal.
> 
> Oryomai

Of course I don't think that you are stupid and it is your right to 
think so, but I do think that it is another excuse to justify 
Severus' abuse of Harry and Neville.
I will sooner concur with the thought that Severus is stuck at the 
emotional age of fifteen year old. :o)

Alla