Obviously guilty was Re: JKR/Oprah interview

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 189663



> Pippin:
> Voldemort was not hunting James and Lily so that he could challenge them to a game of gobstones, LOL. Of course the spy was suspected of killing people. Sirius is outraged when Peter tries to claim that he didn't know what would happen. 

Alla:

I meant not suspected of killing people *directly* Pippin. Of course passing the information lead to bad things for the Order, but what exactly contributed to what specific bad things I do not know, meaning who exactly died specifically due to him passing information.
Anyway, all that I am saying that when you claim that Dumbledore was investigating the murder for a year *before* it happened, I just do not think it was the same thing at all and IMO he should have started a new,

Pippin:
> Anyway, The Order was not a bunch of schoolkids playing soldiers.  They  killed when they had to. Dumbledore says as much. So do Sirius and Lupin. <SNIP>
Alla:

Yes, but they supposedly killed for righteous cause, did they not and no, I do not remember the references to Order members killing people at random? Supposedly they killed when there was no other choice, even Moody supposdly tried to bring people in alive even if not succesful. Are you saying that Dumbledore should have just ASSumed (pun intended) that because they killed Death Eaters they would just turn a switch and turn on their own.


Pippin:
> Did you not think of the spy when Lupin said they were being picked off one by one?
> 
> I'm sure  when the DE's had a chance to call in reinforcements Order members died, and Lupin was referring to that as well. But "one by one" sounds like ambushes and traps to me. So does Moody's description of how various Order members died.


Alla:

Honestly and truly did not even enter my mind, not that I disagree that information about specific mission could have lead to deaths, but all I was and am thinking about is the fact that Deatheaters led numbers. 20:1


> Pippin:
> I think DD knows about love like a farmer could know everything about growing, selling and preparing apples without having  eaten one himself since he was eighteen years old. DD says that he loved his sister and his brother, and Harry, and since you have just proposed that he was telling the truth at King's Cross, we must believe him.

Alla:

Dumbledore claims to love his sister, who he did not want to take care of and planned to leave the world. Dumbledore claimed to love his brother, whom he IMO treated abominably.

Dumbledore indeed claims to love Harry whom he was raising "as pig for slaughter". You are right, I do believe Dumbledore was telling a truth in King's Cross as he understood it. If this is the love Dumbledore knows about, God please save me from somebody who thinks that this is what love is, IMO.


Pippin: 
> Yes, he is very different from Harry. He is much more selfish, but  I do not think that means he is only selfish, rather that he has a mixture of selfish and altruistic motives, like most people. 
> 
> And what I am trying to show here is that in the case of Sirius, implying that Dumbledore did so much twisting as you think requires quite a bit of backflip.


Alla:

No, while I may speculate to my heart's contest about what a disgusting person Dumbledore is, that he did twisting in the case of Sirius only requires canon IMO.

He did not go to the house himself, he sent Hagrid. I was talking about extensive investigation, but really all he needed is whatever one legilimency conversation takes, ONE conversation, just one Pippin.

How do I know that? As I said several times its because that's exactly all it took for mighty Dumbledore to establish Sirius' innocence in PoA. One conversation.

And you may argue that poor dear was so devastated that he never went to see Sirius in Azkaban and have that one conversation, only we know that he has a reason to keep Sirius away, he took a boy whose guardian Sirius was supposed to be and would be if he is innocent. 

Of course it is an inference that Dumbledore deliberately did not do it, but far fetched inference? I do not think so.

JMO,
Alla