Slytherin Treachery ?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 191568



Otto:
>
> Dear Pippin
> 
> Your philibuster of quotations is irrelevant. Slughorns obvious defeatism coupled by the complete defection of Snape at the moment is only the cherry on the cake of a continuous record of Slytherin vileness, trachery, and brutality. The smack in the face to Slughorn to decide on the loyalty of his house is well deserved. He deserved it, he needed it.

Pippin:
On the contrary, Slughorn's character is irrelevant to the issue, which, in case you've forgotten, is the charge that the Slytherin students committed treason en masse. They didn't choose Slughorn to be their Head of House, McGonagall did. If he is unworthy, the responsibility is hers, not theirs.

Otto:
 You cannot and will not EVER be able to get around the fact that that Slytherin table was EMPTY when they left.


Pippin:

So what?

Are you saying the Slytherins left the table because they were traitors and we know  they were traitors because the table was empty when they left? If that's your argument, we'll just have to agree to disagree. 

Otto: 
> Not one Slytherin broke ranks. Not one came over to the side of good. Not one of them fought. Not one is mentioned as standing with the other side.
> 
Pippin:
I would think that you come over to the side of good by doing what the side of good wants you to do. Dumbledore made that very clear to Harry before they went after the Slytherin horcrux in HBP. Harry had to promise to obey any order that Dumbledore gave him, even an order to run away or leave Dumbledore behind in danger. Since that situation didn't arise at the time, it would be a wasted bit of exposition if it can't be applied to something else in the story. 

It would be  nonsense to say that the Slytherins  had implied permission to stay if they wished. I've never been in the military but I have been in command and you don't give "implied" orders. You give them in as straightforward and clear a manner as you can. McGonagall said  "If the rest of your house could follow," If that meant, "except for those who wish to stay and fight," it was her duty to say so explicitly.

Your speculations on how the Slytherins could have established their loyalty are also irrelevant. Why should any declaration of loyalty be believed if the Slytherins weren't trusted already? 

Or do you mean they should have demonstrated their loyalty in such a dramatic way that no one could possibly doubt it any more? 

In that case,  all you've proved is failure to act like a Hollywood hero. I'll concede they may be guilty of that. But to establish that as treason, you must show that this mass failure of imagination knowingly gave aid and comfort to the enemy.


Otto:
> Sorry, Pippin, but "I vuss only followink ORDERS!" Hasn't worked since Nuremberg.

Pippin:

::boggles::

My understanding is   that this concerns orders  such that any reasonable person would recognize them as  orders to commit a crime. Are you now claiming that  Minerva  McGonagall gave such an order to the Slytherins? I'm shocked!

Pippin