It's over, Snape is evil /Ruthless Dumbledore?

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 138472


> Colebiancardi:
> <snip>
> So, without bringing Snape into the argument, what is so 
> unbelievable about DD asking to die for the greater good of the 
> Order? 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> That is PRECISELY what is not believable to me. I believe that JKR 
> hits us  very strongly with " murder hurts the soul" metaphor and
> that is why it is not believable to me ( only my opinion of course) 
> that "epitome of goodness" would ask anybody to hurt their soul for
> any purpose.


Valky:
But we know he did, He ordered Harry to force feed him the potion,
knowing that it could possibly kill him. Does feeding your ally poison
while he is screaming at you to stop qualify as hurting the soul?
It was as near as attempted murder as one could go without ever
attempting murder IMO, Harry's actions in the cave were not light yoke
on his soul.

It's not attempted murder when Harry does it in the cave, so if Snape
was under similar orders to curse Dumbledore on the tower, is it the
same as what Harry did?

There is enough evidence to be going on with speculation that Snapes
AK was either a fake or half hearted, Dumbledores peaceful expression,
his flying up in the air, the fact that Harry's scream never left him
when Dumbledore *should* have already been dead and couldn't move
until approximately the moment when Dumbledores body hit the ground. 
There is absolute mounds of questionables hanging over that Avada
Kedavra, it is absolutely *not* a given indisputable cold blooded AK
we've seen one of those and it looked remarkably different.
Speculation on the reasons for those differences is open to us, I am
sure you agree, the thing is that I disagree that there is any
absolute canon against this one. What Snape did on the tower could be
no worse than what Harry did in the cave, and YES Dumbledore would ask
someone to do it. 

Funny thing is, somehow he is still the 'epitome of goodness', so
there is something we are not seeing, I think.


> Colebiancardi: 
> > DD can be ruthless, you know.  He left Sirius in Azkaban for 13 
> > years - when he could have easily found out that it wasn't Sirius 
> > who killed Harry's parents. 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I am sure we can speculate that Dumbledore COULD have find out 
> anything. To me the fact of the matter is that he had no clue that 
> Sirius was not a secret keeper.
> 
> In fact he testified at the hearing that Sirius indeed was a secret  
> keeper. To leave Sirius in Azkaban knowing that he is innocent would 
> suggest to me a very dark Dumbledore indeed, but I don't remember 
> any proof to that.

Valky:
I am with Alla on this one. I don't think tht Sirius being left in
Azkaban was ruthless Dumbeldore at work. Lily and James had said to DD
thnks very much Sir and please let us handle this one ourselves. He
might have had or not had suspicions for or against Sirius. If he was
at the trial at the MOM it's possible that magicl powers that work on
peoples mind were protectd against within the courts of the MOm, but
even if they weren't and DD using Legilimency realised that Sirius was
telling the truth he consistently has trouble ith the MOM and their
law enforcement, they will have locked Sirius up even if he had argued
agaisnt it. Fudge was only interested in DD's opinion when it didn't
conflict with his. There is no canon saying that DD thought Sirius was
guilty. Rumour has it the DD testified that Sirius *was* Lily and
James secret keeper, and he may well have gone as far as to say
"..*when* I knew who the secret keeper was, which I did not after such
and such date, upon the decision of Lily and James themselves." But
would Fudge's MOM have paid any attention to this part of Dumbledores
testimony? No they wouldn't.

Finally, Dumbeldore did not go to Godrics Hollow to collect Harry,
Hagrid did, and Sirius went there too. Dumbledore most likely couldn't
because he was not given the information by the secret keeper, and the
house was still hiding Harry. 

My take on all this, Dumbledore wasn't really testifying against
Sirius, he was used by Fudge's MOM to lock Sirius up in Azkaban, and
because he couldn't testify against the real secret keeper he had no
choice but to give his true testimony of what he knew, which Fudge
latched onto like a vulture.

 
> Colebiancardi:
>  He also had no problem convincing Flamel to 
> > *die* as well.  And throughout the last couple of books, DD has 
> > stated there are worst things than death.  
> > 
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Did he though? Or did he do what JKR suggested in interview he
> usually does? Let Flamel figure things on his own after their little 
> chat?
> And I would like to say it again - there are things worse than death 
> per Dumbledore, but I don't remember him saying that there is a  
> thing worse than murder.
> 

Valky:
I have a take on this one too, since my recent reread of PS/SS. 
I think that Dumbledore and Flamels little chat would have been about
Harry. Flamel was, I think, over it all, ready to move on and destroy
the stone, for quite a while before Harry started Hogwarts, but
Dumbledore had asked him if he could use the stone for this one little
thing that would be very important to the world. Flamel, having had
already more riches and life than he could stomach, said, sure Old
Friend, I am glad to offer it to the good of the WW, it's boring the
hell out of me lately anyhow, nice to see it put to good use again at
last. ;D

Valky
Remembering, Cedric Diggory