I'd want to see a shot that kills off the boner that people have for Luna Lovegood. Molly and Ginny Weasley aren't the ones with the potentially weirdfuck obsessive personality:

 

:awesome


Luna may seem nice and cute in movies, but if you had a girl this weird in your school, you wouldnt find her as the best company there is. Mainly because the girl is as nuts as they come. probably as nuts as Bellatrix, only in a non-violent way. Thats a big turn off, for me at east.

 

You're right, that is some weird shit.

 

I find it appalling that Harry would even name a child of his after a fucking child abuser. Ugh. I always see this name as some form of disgusting 3-some. It's scarred me for fucking life. Whatever JKR was thinking, she must of been on some drug that enhanced her feeling of liking 3 gay men together. Sorry, had to get that out of my system.

As for more Harry Potter books? No fucking way. I'm not reading that shit after the total disaster of books 5-7.

 

Well, could of been worse; could of been Tom Marvolo-Albus-Severus Potter-Weasley. :awesome

(Hey, he named one of his kids after two manipulative bastards, why not do a hat track and name your kid after the guy who murdered your parents and then tried to murder you repeatedly, too?)

 

I wouldn't really call Snape manipulative. He was really just an immature, bullying douchebag. IMO, Albus Severus is not too far from Albus Vernon. All that's missing is the creepy stalker part.

 

Severus Snape was wily,talented and extremely brave when it comes down to it. Manipulative he is not.

Harry however is an idiot and I'm not that surprised that he never figured out that Albus Dumbledore was a manipulative old fuck who would have gotten him killed if not for a stroke of good luck.

I'm still not convinced the mo-fo had a plan beyond; "find horcruxes,destroy, sacrifice Harry to Voldemort and get someone else to do my dirty work while I take a nap in my tomb".

 

Except for the entire section of the series where Dumbledore knew perfectly well that Harry would be totally fine if Voldemort tried to kill him?

Do you people even read the same books as me? Because seriously, there was that whole thing where Voldemort took Harry's blood, tethered him to life and shit? You miss that?

Fact of the matter is, Dumbledore ruined Voldemort's shit even after he was dead and Harry proved himself completely inept at everything save dying.

I hate it when people bad-mouth canon Dumbledore because if he hadn't been fucking omniscient and a total badass, Harry and half the wizarding world would be taking a dirt nap by the end of the seventh book.

 

Although I agree with most of that, I'm not sure Dumbledore knew anything 100%. As far as I know, Harry could very well have died.

The fact is, he didn't, and in large parts it's thanks to Dumbledore, even after his death.

 

Is there an essay somewhere which displays/explains Dumbledore's plan/manipulations throughout the series in an impartial (aka, not written by a manipulative!Dumbledore fan) and indepth manner? (I wonder if there's something like this on the Lexicon?)

If not, it could be a joint DLP member project?

 

What an idea....a sequel to the 7 books long Harry Potter.

My feeling is mixed on this. I started reading Harry Potter when I was twelve....and now I'm twenty something. The books are a part of my childhood memory.

I;m not going to say that the idea doesn't have a certain allure: going back to the time when you were young, when the world is new and beautiful...but Harry is grown up now. Let the child go.

I don't want to read another HP books written for commercial sake. Let the story ends and stay good in our memory.

 

Dumbledore should have declared martial law as Chief Warlock in late 1970´s, made having Dark Mark an offense punishable by Kiss, released all information about murdering and psychopathic halfblood hypocrite Tom Riddle to media, hired bounty hunters or asked for international help to fight Death Eaters without needing to rely on sympathetic pureblood elements in DMLE and Wizengamot.

But he was too weak and cowardly to kill Tom Riddle. So he decided to believe in some nebulous prophecy and left mantle of Vanquisher to a child. But he did not left child without any weapons.

He give him unwillingness to kill, he left him with blood protections at Privet Drive that protected child from (as far as we know) ZERO attempts of DE and LV but they did not protect child from neglect and abuse, he give him absolutely insufficent education in DADA, Potions etc., he left child with piece of soul of murderer for 16 years, he give him no familial support because he sent child´s godfather to prison without trial because of EVIDENCE that he had.

AD did not want to kill Tom Riddle but he was arrogant enough to believe that only he knows how to vanquish him and he made a plan that made him lily-white martyr, left his toy Snape dying as traitor after his usefulness was at end and left his own child soldier with no choices but to willingly go to his own death (while there was a CHANCE for HP´s resurrection it was NOT AD´s own doing but that of Lily and Voldemort).

 

You read too much fanfiction. OotP proved that as Chief Warlock, Dumbledore had powers that amounted to absolutely sweet fuck all. Not to mention that that's precisely what happened; Crouch giving aurors the power to use the unforgivable curses in their pursuit of Death Eaters.

What good would releasing the truth about Tom Riddle actually achieve? As demonstrated in the last four books, no Death Eaters really had any blood purity agenda except some token attempts to justify the thirty or so years they spent attempting to overthrow the Ministry.

As for mercenaries or international aid; what evidence is there in canon that these things actually exist or were possible? Lets face it as Minister for Magic in Bulgaria or some other nation, you're hardly going to turn around and decide that provoking the biggest and baddest bully in the playground is a particularly good idea.

His inability to kill Tom Riddle was hardly an act of weakness or the sign of a coward; did you forget the whole seven horcruxes thing? Also, the prophesy was proven to be correct; Voldemort honoured it, marked him and gave him a number of his own skills and attributes in the process. I think it was in the sixth book when Dumbledore says something to the effect of: "Voldemort chose his own nemesis and single-handedly gave him the tools with which to finish the job."

Dumbledore at no point told Harry that killing was a bad thing. He knew full well that it'd have to be at Harry's hand that Voldemort finally died. I challenge you to find a single reference in the books to Dumbledore telling Harry that killing was wrong. Believe it or not, most normal, moral people believe that killing is wrong.

I'm not going to go into the whole blood protection/Dursley abuse issue. Dumbledore didn't know Harry had a part of Voldemort's soul. He had no evidence to suggest that Sirius was not a Death Eater; Lily cast the Fidelius Charm.

Finally you've actually said something that made sense; Dumbledore was the only person with any iota of an idea of how to destroy Voldemort. It was he that discovered and recognised the Horcruxes. It was he that set in motion the plan that would ultimately lead to his downfall.

On the otherhand, he never set himself as anything like a martyr, if you recall correctly Dumbledore arranged his death to break the power of the Elder wand. He did not abandon Snape to die as a traitor, though I feel he ought to have warned him that Voldemort would eventually try to kill him for mastery of the Elder Wand, but nobody is perfect.

And for the record, as much as I hate the Death Hallows, the entire point of the series of events where Harry is killed, is that he has to CHOOSE to die. That was the entire point of the last third of the novel.

So yeah, the force is not strong with you.

By force I mean English Comprehension.

 

@Hoshiakari: I don't know which is worse - the fact that nmb demolished your wall of fanon bullshit in one post, or the fact that every "argument" regarding Dumbledore's failures had been brought up and shot down long before you became a member.

At least you didn't call Dumbledore a "manipulative old coot." That would've put a herp in my derps, so I could derpderp while I herpderp.