What did you find in the unedited version that refutes the edited version?
I found quite a bit in teh unedited audio that, to me, made the actions of the IDF fully justified.
First, I state that the IDF would not be justified in boarding the ship(s) simply because someone on board is an antisemitic douchebag with a microphone.
But the woman essentially states that they are flat out refusing to comply with orders and said that the IDF doesn't have the authority to sto pthem. The IDF guy responds (again) that failure to comply will have dire consequences.
Regardless of the questions about the legality of the Israeli blockade (Thats' a separate issue to me), ignoring that order was stupidity of the
highest order.
It placed full responsibility for all of th edeaths on thiose who made the decision to refuse said order.
If I start walking towards a cop with his gun out, and he says "Stop or I'll shoot" and I repsond with "You have no leagal authority to tell me to stop, so I'm going to continue walking. I'm unarmed and I don't want to hurt you" and I ocntinue walkign toward the cop, I would pretty much deserve to be shot.
I don't care if the cop was legallly authorized to say that to me or not, the fact that I ignored the order means I'm an idiot.
I think the editing was done to strike an emotional chord by implying that the antisemitism itself was a justification for the IDF boarding the ship.
I think it was edited to make it seem as though there was little else said other than antisemitic remarks.
I'm not sure why that decision was made, but I personally feel it was a terrible decision.
Nothing refutes the fact that there were antisemitic remarks made, and I'm not trying to imply that there was.
But tampering is not only done to make someone look bad, it can also be done to make things look "worse" in regards to certian things in order to make an emotional appeal.
The logical appeal inherent in the unedited audio is far more effective in my opinion.