Who was responsible for Sirius' death? ...

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 167718

wynnleaf
First, on the whole I agree with Magpie's last post on this thread 
and won't repeat it all.

Now to a few of Dana's comments:

Dana:
I do not understand this at all. What is Snape purpose as a spy if he
does not provide the Order with information to prevent stuff from
happening? If the Order can move before LV is able to execute his
plans, then automatically the people involved are less at risk from
being killed then to have to fight DEs one on one.

wynnleaf
You are not taking into account the real problems of spying.

In real wars, spies often discover information about future attacks 
or other actions that will take lives.  However, unless the 
commanders of the war can find alternative ways in which the enemy 
can assume they came by the information, they often will *not* act 
on that information, because to do so would reveal the source of 
their information to the enemy.  For instance, there are cases in 
WWII where the allies broke secret codes and discovered information 
about attacks, but would do nothing to counter those attacks because 
they didn't want to reveal to the enemy that the code had been 
broken, otherwise the enemy would change the code.  Sorry -- it's a 
hard truth, but that's the way it is.  Same goes for spies.  If you 
act on knowledge that you could have only obtained from your spy, 
then you may be revealing to the enemy where the knowledge came 
from.  

So it would easily be possible -- even likely -- that Snape would 
bring vital information to the Order about a planned attack.  But if 
this were information that *only* trusted DE's were privy to, and 
there was no other way for the Order to get that information, then 
the Order could not allow LV to know they'd received the info 
without alerting him to the fact that he had a spy in the camp.  
Since he *knows* that the Order thinks Snape is a spy, LV would 
automatically know that it was Snape that gave the information.

You're probably thinking that the Order could still protect people 
without Voldemort realizing that they had gotten inside 
information.  Tell that to the commanders in real wars.  Yes, you 
can sometimes do that, but many times you can't.  We don't know -- 
because we simply aren't told -- how much information Snape has 
brought to the Order that *has* been extremely beneficial.  What 
you're basically saying is that because people have died, or attacks 
have been made, Snape has failed.  That's simply not believable 
because it is sooo unrealistic.

Dana:
This is not just Harry going on
some school trip, this is serious war business but Snape treats it
like Harry is just facing another detention with Dolores.

wynnleaf
You seem to be completely missing the point regarding the danger 
Harry faced that night.  As far as any other staff member, including 
Snape, was concerned, Harry faced no more danger from Umbridge than 
detentions and point losses.  The real danger to Harry came, not 
because of Umbridge, but because of Harry's own decision to attempt 
a trip to London -- which had absolutely nothing to do with his 
being with Umbridge that night.  

You're make this odd leap and assuming that because Snape knew Harry 
was with Umbridge (who was not *known* to do more than put kids in 
detention, take points, etc.), he should have realized that Harry 
would be facing imminent danger.  But the danger that Harry 
ultimately faced had little to do with Umbridge, and everything to 
do with Harry's "saving people thing" and rushing off to London.  
While Snape may have known that Harry tended to break rules and get 
into trouble (as Snape would consider it), as long as Harry was with 
Umbridge, he couldn't run off to London -- so as regards the primary 
danger to Harry that night (as far as Snape would think, who doesn't 
know about Umbridge's torturing tendencies), Harry was "safe" as 
long as he was *with* Umbridge.  Of course, we the readers know that 
Umbridge tortured kids and later tried to crucio Harry.  But neither 
Snape nor any other staff member including Dumbledore knew that.

As for Umbridge's power to expel Harry, yes, she did have that 
power.  But Snape being there or not wouldn't affect that in the 
least.  Snape couldn't "protect" Harry from expulsion.  You seem to 
suppose that Snape should have been waiting around in case Umbridge 
had chucked Harry off the grounds of Hogwarts in the middle of the 
night.  Expulsion takes at least some sort of administrative 
motions, and surely Snape would realize that any throwing Harry off 
the grounds would at least wait until morning.  

Magpie
You seem to be on the one hand saying that Umbridge was reason 
enough for DDM!Snape to get involved, and then arbitrarily mark the 
moment when he does act as the point at which he must.

wynnleaf
Further, Dana acts as though Dumbledore would completely lose faith 
in Snape if he didn't alert the Order to go to the MOM at the time 
he did, but apparently Dumbledore would have absolutely no problem 
with these other actions of Snape's (leaving Harry with Umbridge), 
even though Dana sees them as major areas of culpability on Snape's 
part.  Dumbledore did not, after all, appear to question Snape's 
leaving Harry with Umbridge.

Dana, you know, I think what bothers me most is your view of 
Dumbledore and Voldemort.  Dumbledore is completely wishy washy, 
unable to accurately evaluate even the most basic things like 
whether or not Snape is really risking his life spying, or whether 
or not his spy is doing the Order any good.  He's obviously clueless 
about how Voldemort really thinks.  He trusts Snape through thick 
and thin, will have no problem with some of the supposedly grossly 
culpable things Snape does like leaving Harry with Umbridge, yet 
will quickly toss Snape out if he doesn't send alert the Order.  
Being "late" in sending the Order won't bother Dumbledore, but not 
sending them at all will make Dumbledore ditch Snape.   And your 
view of Voldemort is this easily predictable, mentally stable guy 
who can be counted on to forgive Snape practically anything.

I almost feel as though we are having a discussion in which you are 
talking about two completely different characters that aren't even 
in canon.

Dana:
I never implied Snape is LV's man but is actions do not risk, him
being found out as DDM either. His actions reflect his own attempt to
keep himself on both side of the fence and not do anything that would
risk this position at least not before HBP.

wynnleaf
It's interesting to see you say that.  However, I must say that 
intentional or not, you *did* imply it.  It certainly came across 
loud and clear, regardless of you intent.  

Snape is not "on the fence" if, as you say, all of his actions are 
benefiting Voldemort and none are benefiting the Order.  Since you 
do not accept *any* of the evidence of his actions benefiting the 
Order, yet you do accept and even invent evidence for his benefiting 
Voldemort, what we have, in effect, is a Snape who is on Voldemort's 
side -- not a Snape swinging back and forth on the fence.

You, of course, are welcome to continue to affirm that Snape is "on 
the fence," but that doesn't fit unless you can show more or less 
equal advantage to the Order as you claim he gives to Voldemort.

wynnleaf, who completely agrees with Magpie's post, and won't 
reiterate each individual point.