Dumbledore's role in Sirius' death was Re: ESE!Snape (Was loads of other stuff)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 98985

Neri:
>So basically JKR wrote that DD said that Voldemort realized, on 
the  basis of information from Kreacher, that the one person 
whom Harry would go to any length to rescue was Sirius Black. 
This boils down to  Voldy, not the greatest expert on the subject, 
making this deduction  according to the information from a 
half-crazy house-elf, who had his  reasons to hate Sirius 
specifically<

Pippin:
Dumbledore says, flat out,  that the power behind the locked 
door took Harry to save Sirius, because of the bond that had 
grown between them. Was he wrong? Possibly. But can you offer 
another reason why  Dumbledore felt he had to protect Sirius 
specifically, when he let Arthur and Lupin face danger? Was it 
because Sirius was too rash to be trusted? That is what Molly 
thinks.  But she conveniently forgot that Lupin and Arthur have 
been known to act rashly too. 
 

> Pippin previously:
> The one thing Voldemort understands about love is that people 
are willing to compromise their principles for it.<
> 
> 
> Neri:
> Quite a powerful thing. So what was the part that he missed?


Pippin:
According to canon, that it would save baby Harry from the killing 
curse and teenage Harry from possession. But I'm sure JKR will 
have more to say about this. 

> Pippin previously:
> The hostage had to be someone who would bring Harry to the 
Ministry *even if* Harry knew why Voldemort was plotting to get 
him there.

> What's complicated is that Harry didn't know as much as 
Voldemort thought he did, and so Harry didn't realize there was a 
moral dilemma--he'd have handed over the prophecy for Neville 
if the Order hadn't shown up in time.<
 
> Neri:
> Exactly. So Harry didn't know that in order to save Sirius, or in  
order to save Neville, he has to trade the future of the whole WW.  
Had he known this, would he go to THIS length to rescue Sirius?
 
 I don't know. That's another hypothetical question. <

But it's not a hypothetical question for Dumbledore. Consider 
Molly. Dumbledore says she might know already, from her 
magical clock, that Arthur was in mortal peril. She knew where 
he was. But even though he might have died unrescued,  
Dumbledore trusted  her not to go to him, lest she betray the 
Order. That's what's expected of her. No child should have to 
make such a decision. Dumbledore knew that, so he decided, 
unwisely, to keep Harry in the dark.

> Pippin:
> I agree with Neri (and Kneasy ) that Dumbledore couldn't have
 anticipated that Voldemort would learn about the Harry-Sirius
 bond from Kreacher. But he might well have feared that
Voldemort would learn about it from *Sirius* .
> 
> If Sirius fell into Voldemort's hands, Voldemort might find he
had captured not simply an Order member but one who could be 
used against Harry himself. Sirius was the weapon.

> Did he know it? I think he did.


> Neri:
> Perhaps Sirius indeed thought that he is the ultimate anti-Harry 
 weapon. We know that Voldemort thought so. But did Sirius? 
Could be,  but I don't think he was that arrogant. <

Arrogant, to believe Dumbledore if Dumbledore explained to him 
that his love for Harry might become a weapon in Voldemort's 
hands? Why would that be arrogant?  


> Neri must add:
> OK, I think I finally got it. The point is to take a character who
is  as good as possible and prove that he is actually ESE. <

Pippin:
I can only speak for myself, but I was merely applauding Kneasy 
for his determination. <g> Did you think I was trying to prove that 
Dumbledore was evil? I was trying to show that he was good, in 
that he did care about Sirius's emotional state, but was willing, 
with Sirius's consent, to put it at risk to defend Harry. 

It is much the same situation that Harry faced on the 
chessboard. He would not go to any lengths to save Ron, if it 
meant that Voldemort got the stone. Of course Dumbledore was 
foolish, as he admits. He should have realized that Harry had 
already faced such a test and passed it. But it's one thing to 
watch a child assume such a burden on his own, and quite 
another to lay it on him.

Pippin