Snape a mole all along? WAS: Re: Draco, Harry & Norbert

[zgirnius]

No: HPFGUIDX 152814


> nowheregirrrl:
>  The
> link is:
> http://www.redhen-publications.com/Loyaulte.html

zgirnius:
I don't buy the theory, but would second the recommendation. That 
essay is a nice read.

> nowheregirrrl:
> The three instances Jodel points out:  
> 1.  The Marietta Edgecombe incident.  DD tells the Aurors and 
Ministry
> people that HE organized Dumbledore's Army.  

zgirnius:
I would hesitate to speak for Alla, but I believe her point is that 
Dumbledore would not lie to HARRY, not that he would not lie at all. 
In PS/SS Dumbledore told Harry that he would not lie to him, but that 
there might be questions he would refuse to answer. I see a good deal 
of evidence in the books to support the idea that Dumbledore has kept 
this promise, though in ways which might be termed deceptive. I do 
think Dumbledore tries to guide Harry away from questions he would 
prefer not to answer in preference to having Harry raise them, and 
refusing to answer, but that is not lying either, is it? 

The notable example I think we could all agree on would be the story 
of the Prophecy as told in OotP. Harry is shown the memory by having 
Trelawney rise out of the Pensieve, insetad of entering the Pensieve 
to see the scene. (We now know this hid the indentity of Snapem the 
eavesdropper). And when Dumbledore talks about the eavesdropper, he 
gives no hint that his identity was known to him at the time, or 
would be of any siugnificance to Harry. though of course it is both.

> nowheregirrrl:
> 2.  The prophesy being overheard (see Lilygale's comment above).  Of
> course he lied to Harry as DD knew Voldemort was sharing Harry's 
brain
> for most of that year.  DD couldn't tell Harry anything about Snape
> other than the DD and SS cover story that they've been telling for
> years.  

zgirnius:
I disagree that we know Dumbledore lied about the prophecy, or 
anything else, to Harry in OotP. He did avoid Harry for most of the 
year, which was certainly a way to avoid questions he did not want to 
answer because Voldemort might overhear. He tells Harry as much, at 
the end.

Red Hen makes an argument that Dumbledore's account of the events is 
factually incorrect because Snape heard the entire prophecy. Based on 
the statement of Trelawney, this is certainly a possibility, but 
Trelawney's statement does not rule out Dumbledore's version of the 
story. 

For example: Snape is listening at the door. Trelawney starts 
prophesying (she feels a little odd, as per her statement). The 
barman, having just come up the stairs, sees Snape  and 
unceremoniously yanks him away after he hears the bit we have all 
been told Voldemort knows. Snape and the barman struggle, and Snape 
makes protestations of innocence. During this short struggle, 
Trelawney completes the Prophecy. Having gained the upper hand (hey, 
Snape is a skinny 20-year old, the barman has been dealing with the 
colorful clientele of the Hog's Head lo these many years) the barman 
throws open the door and drags Snape in to let Dumbledore know what 
he has found. Trelawney, now out of her trance, sees this and 
remembers it. Dumbledore is now more disposed to give her a job (hey, 
she IS a Seer! and she has inside her head a hot secret Voldemort 
would love to know.) Death Eater Snape heads out to report the only 
part of hte prophecy he heard. I don't see a problem.



> 3.  Snape's remorse regarding the Potter's deaths.  Of course he 
felt
> remorse, just as DD did.  But DD insinuates Snape's remorse made him
> turn.  That's likely a lie.  Snape was already DDM.
>
zgirnius:
Well, I don't see the evidence, other than the possibility he knew 
the whole prophecy. What evidence we have hangs together well with 
the story of Snape having been in truth a Death Eater at the time he 
delivered the prophecy.