looong - musings on Dumbledore - Even Longer

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 158668

> Hickengruendler:
<SNIP>
> IMO, there's no excuse for Dumbledore not doing anything to make 
the 
> Dursleys treat Harry better. A few visits or maybe even letters in 
a 
> month would probably have been sufficient for Harry being treated 
at 
> least semily decent.<SNIP>  

Alla:

I knew we would agree on the major point, heeee.


> James:
> 
> > Can ANYONE think of ANY ACTION that DD has taken meddling in 
> Harry's life that was actually of any net benefit to Harry?
>  
> Hickengruendler:
> 
> Well, Voldie tells at the end of GoF, that he couldn't attack 
Harry 
> at the Dursleys. Therefore we can assume, that the very reason, 
why 
> he didn't even try was said protection. Which is also the reason, 
why 
> I can't agree with Alla's list, why the protection didn't work 
there. 
> It worked as good as it can, and the fact that nothing happens at 
> Privet Drive is the proof for this. Voldie didn't even try to 
break 
> the protection. 

Alla:

Erm.... it worked as well as it can? You mean during the Graveyard? 
Where do you see the protection in action there? When Harry's arm 
was sliced? Or when he was running for his life with images holding 
him up?

It is possible that protection worked at privet Drive. My point is 
1) it is not shown and 2) that we saw when it worked **not** at 
privet drive, therefore why cannot Harry stay at other place if 
protection works anyways?



Hickengruendler:
Blaming for him for not stepping in on the Dursleys or for 
> placing Harry there on the first place? Yes. But he's not to blame 
> for Hagrid being sent to Azkaban or for the Dementors' attack on 
> Harry.

Alla:

Well, sure I agree with you on this one, but those are minor points 
IMO. I would also add not doing enough in Sirius' case.


> > Sherry:
> > 
> > I would agree with you, except for one very important fact.  It 
was the mere
> > word of Dumbledore that kept Snape out of Azkaban.  All 
Dumbledore had to do
> > was to stand up and declare that Severus Snape was not a death 
eater, and
> > the whole wizengamut took his word for it.
> 
> Pippin:
> No. The tribunal had already considered Snape's case when 
Dumbledore
> announced at Karkaroff's hearing that Snape had been cleared. 
Dumbledore
> was simply reminding the court of a verdict they'd already 
reached, on
> what evidence we do not know.
<SNIP>


Alla:

Yes, what we saw was DD reminding the court of what already happened 
and as ar as we know - what indeed happened was Snape getting out 
because of DD testimony, did he not?

> Hickengruendler:
<SNIP>
> Do I think Dumbledore needed to have investigated further about 
> Sirius' case? Maybe. But you could just as well argue, that he 
could 
> have investigated some of the other cases further, where nobody 
got a 
> trial. There is just so much Dumbledore can do.
>

Alla:

Sorry, but I disagree that Sirius' case was a case just as any 
other. It was a case against the member of the order, trusted small 
group of people whom Dumbledore lead. Do I think that DD owed Sirius 
further investigation? Yes, I do. 


>  
> > > a_svirn:
> > > > Exactly. Especially since Dumbledore went to considerable 
> > lengths to
> > > > plant that boy-who-lived image.
>   
> > > montims:
> > > Not doubting this, but where in canon does it say that DD did 
> this?
> > >
> > 
> > a_svirn:
> > Who else?  
> 
> Hickengruendler:
> 
> The ministry? I mean, surely the attack on Godric's Hollow didn't 
> pass by unnoticed. The muggle authorities will have found out, and 
> the MoM probably learned pretty soon, who the victims were. 
><SNIP>


Alla:

Oooo, the ministry is actually a really good guess. Good to know 
that DD maybe innocent in this what I would consider rather 
disgusting behaviour.

JMO,

Alla