Blood Protection/Dumbledore and Harry

[littleleahstill]

No: HPFGUIDX 158564

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jordan Abel" <random832 at ...> 
wrote:
>
> > Leah:
> > Lily's loving sacrifice had set up a deep protection for
> > Harry, which would keep him safe provided he could call home the
> > place where his mother's blood dwelt.  For that to happen, 
Petunia's
> > home has to be Harry's home.
> 
> Random832:
> But it is not in any way certain that he will be harmed if not 
placed
> with the Dursleys.
> 
> And why not take Petunia away to live somewhere else? Kill off 
Vernon
> "for the greater good".

Leah:  So it's not alright for DD to place a child in the safest 
place that very wise person can think of, however otherwise 
imperfect it is, but it is perfectly Ok for him to kidnap one muggle 
and kill off another who is rather inconvenient? This is DD making 
the arrangements, not Voldemort.  

> 
> The _fact_ that the protection depends on a particular choice of
> placement may be "beyond legalities", but Dumbledore does NOT have 
an
> absolute right to place Harry under that protection if it requires
> violating his parents' will.

Leah: We don't know that, because we don't know how the wizarding 
legal system operates.  Even in the muggle world, it would be 
possible for others, the state or other family members to challenge 
arrangements for guardianship, if these were felt to be unsuitable. 
And perhaps James and Lily would have agreed with DD if they had 
known the full situation.  A will is an imperfect document made in 
circumstances known to the testator at the time.  If I'd appointed  
X guardian of my children and X then murdered me, I might have a 
fleeting moment of regret for my appointment.
  
> > Leah:
> > Sirius was obeying DD's instructions, however reluctantly.
> 
> Random832:
> And then, later, DD completely screwed him. Sirius made a wrong
> decision. A wrong decision which was to be the first of several 
that
> night.

And in what way was DD responsible for that wrong decision?  Your 
words 'completely screwed him' suggest that DD reneged on some 
promise or deal.  No one thought fit to tell DD that Sirius was no 
longer Secret Keeper; Snape had apparently tried to change James' 
mind about the appointment of Sirius without success- no doubt DD 
knew of that.   The Potters must have been betrayed by their Secret 
Keeper, and as far as the vast majority of the WW knew, that was the 
man whose brother was a DE, and whose parents were dark wizards.  
Where exactly is any of this DD's fault?  

> 
> > Leah:
> > ...   None of those homes  would  have
> > given him the protection conferred on him by Petunia.
> 
> Random832:
> None of which means he would not have otherwise been safe. Any of
> those other places, he would also not have been abused.
(snipped) 
> The blood protection is not perfect. It did not protect him from
> whatever "experience" it was that "taught him to stay well out of
> Vernon's reach". It did not protect him from being portkeyed away 
and
> having his arm sliced open by the very man who condemned his 
parents
> to death. It has not protected him from Voldemort personally at all
> since the end of fourth year. Surely he could be better protected 
at
> Grimmauld Place once the blood protection was out of the equation.


Leah:

As Alla has pointed out in her reply to your post, we do not know 
the full meaning of the blood protection.  Stepping outside canon 
for a moment, I imagine the thing to be a bit like being pursued by 
Dracula.  The best thing to do is to festoon yourself and your room 
with garlic and crucifixes.  Those will not of course protect you 
from from being assaulted, even from abuse from your relatives; they 
will not protect you from falling ill or being hit by a train.  All 
of those are part of the hazards of living.  They will protect from 
a particular and horrifying evil.  I think we will see just what 
this is when Harry turns 17.

Leah