It's over, Snape is evil (was: Dumbledore and Snape again)

[eggplant107]

No: HPFGUIDX 137517

"Matt" <hpfanmatt at g...> wrote:

> Trust is a commodity, not an on-off
> state.  Voldemort may have some
> trust in Snape, but he must also have
> doubts about him and his
> possible loyalty to Dumbledore

Murdering Dumbledore, the good guys greatest weapon next to Harry
seems like an excessive price to pay to increasing Voldemort's already
considerable trust in Snape by a few percent. In fact, after killing
the greatest wizard in the world Voldemort might keep a very close
watch on Snape; when one of Stalin's generals had achieved a great
victory or became very popular with the troops was the time he was
most in dander of being purged, Stalin didn't want the competition.

> Even if Snape had Voldemort's trust
> before the confrontation on the
> tower, that trust was 100% at risk
> once Snape walked up those stairs 
> and took in the scene.If Snape had
> obstructed Voldemort's plan to kill
> Dumbledore, rather than aiding it,
> he'd have raised a huge new
> question about his loyalty.   

Not so, Snape could have killed all the Death Eaters and then told
Voldemort that Dumbledore had done it. It would make a plausible
story, Draco really didn't confide all the details to Snape so he
could claim to be on the other side of the castle at the time.

> You also assume that the Order's 
> current lack of trust in Snape
> cannot be remedied. 

That is correct, no conservable turn of events could make me forgive
Snape and a doubt Harry or any member of the Order would feel very
different.

> Snape has already shown he is 
> pretty good at restoring others'
> trust in him. 

Yes, but not this time, nobody is that good.

> He managed to simultaneously get
> the two most powerful wizards of
> his time (and apparently two of
> the most accomplished Legilimenses
> ever) to believe diametrically
> opposite stories concerning 
> his loyalty 

That is true so logically we can conclude he must have been lying to
one of them for many years and gotten away with it, but if he's good
enough to fool one he's good enough to fool the other too and that's
exactly what I think he's doing. I don't believe Snape would be
content being anybody's right hand man, he wants to be number one and
his actions over the last 16 years are perfectly consistent with that.

> Suppose the request Dumbledore 
> made was simply "if it comes 
> down to killing me or breaking
> your vow (and dying yourself),
> I insist that you kill me." 

What do you mean "if it comes down to that"? Once Snape made that
Unbreakable Vow it HAD to come down to that. And Dumbledore couldn't
have ordered him to make it because until 10 minutes before even Snape
didn't know anybody would ask him to make such a vow. He made it to
get Bellatrix off his back at no cost because he was only vowing to do
what he would have done anyway. 

> He [Harry] does not say he 
> won't rest until Snape is dead. 

Does Harry really need to spell that out? If Harry kills Voldemort and
Snape still lives do you really imagine he will forget about Snape and
just play Quidditch and eat ice cream in Hogsmead? I don't think so. 

> He says he won't rest until 
> *Voldemort* is dead, and if
> Snape gets in his way, so 
> much the worse for Snape. 

And Harry says he now hates Snape just as much as he hates Voldemort,
if Snape is really a good guy in disguise then Dumbledore's mysterious
plan was a disastrous flop guaranteed to lead to tragedy because one
of them is going to kill the other, it's only a matter of time.

> Maybe Harry has been further
> poisoned against Snape 

One of the great understatements of all time.

Eggplant