@brennen.exe:
Oda is making a point that Hancock is blindly in love with Luffy. That's why. He even emphasizes it this chapter. Hancock's actions were part of that running gag, and each and every moment of it was done in such a way that she could easily get away with it. Oda prepped her character for that exact type of scenario, and IMO did well in choosing who he included in them.
Disagree and it's due to the bold, not only had Oda established her blind love well (by having her agree to go to the place of her torment for Luffy) but this chapter shows this blind love in a far more gag like manner without requiring the readers to suspend their disbelief and accept that Smoker, and Sentomaru would both say nothing, especially Smoker who she just admitted her connection to Luffy to. Then what's more is that what you're telling me would mean that Oda had WB order Marco to protect Luffy at all costs only to then (the very next chapter mind you) have Hancock save Luffy for a gag that by that point was already well established, then he proceeds to have Hancock later being called on her treacherous actions by another prominent Govt. man for the same well established gag which could've been accomplished in a much more gag like fashion (similar to how he did it this chapter)? Oda showed that he could do this without making us believe that major marines would suddenly don the dunce cap or just start giving free passes to pirates for no real reason.
@brennen.exe:
Zoom out. Before the war starts, Hancock turns Momonga's crew into stone, claiming she will be forgiven because she is beautiful. At the start of the war, Hancock attacks Marines for no good reason, claiming she will be forgiven because she is beautiful. Also note that she points out– or rather, ODA points out-- that her terms were to participate in fighting against Whitebeard, which she was doing. She then attacks Smoker, saying she will be forgiven because she is beautiful. Later still, she attacks Pacifista, randomly spouting about love being a hurricane, which makes no sense at all to Sentoumaru. ONE instance ties her to Luffy, while all four fit her character profile. This doesn't even touch on the other Marines' word against Smoker's.
I've argued against this point so many times…
Anyway, there's a clear distinction between Hancock attacking pirates and marines without prejudice and making it seem like she just didn't care about the marines around her being collateral damage vs. stopping whatever she was doing at the time and running over and attacking Smoker while yelling, "keep your hands off my love" (paraphrasing). And if ODA meant for that line Hancock used on the fodder marines to serve as a free pass for everything beyond that one instance then he certainly wouldn't have bothered to depict Hancock having the marines call in for her so she could chase after Luffy, because then why even bother? She could just say, "I did my job now I'm going off to where I please". Again I think you're misusing the idea of the author speaking through a character and you're missing the nuance and distinction between scenarios in which it's a character stating an unwavering fact and just stating what they know based off their own experience.
@brennen:
Like I said, Smoker has a reputation. That aside, sure, he knows Hancock attacked him, but Hancock attacked other Marines too. She's a Government-hating, man-hating pirate, so why would they believe Smoker's testimony about her protecting Strawhat when she hates men, other Marines reported Luffy "defeating" Hancock, and then later reported her chasing after him at the end of the war? Hancock hates men, Luffy just "defeated" her, Smoker failed to capture Luffy for the third time, and Smoker hates pirates. "Hancock saving a man? HAHAHA, sounds more like you are butthurt, Smoker. Amirite?"
And as I said, you're misrepresenting his character. He has a reputation of being strong willed and ignoring orders that don't agree with his own sense of justice, that doesn't mean that the marines feel like they can't trust him (otherwise he wouldn't be employed and certainly wouldn't be a commodore), it's not like he was told to take a vacation whilst they fought the war.
And again Hancock attacking other marines was atleast in a situation in which she sold it enough to garner the benefit of the doubt, but the Smoker and Sentomaru stuff was her openly betraying them.
marine: Fleet Admiral Sengoku sir! We have a report from Sentomaru that Hancock was witnessed intentionally destroying Pacifista and when he asked her why she said, "Because love is a hurricane!"
Sengoku: Hmm. This is troubling considering that I have already received a report from Commodore Smoker claiming that she attacked him to save Strawhat Luffy while telling him to "keep his hands off her love".
what could this all mean?!
@brennen:
Fan speculation. Moria failed against Luffy; Dofla, the WG, and Sengoku all acknowledged his usefulness uselessness had run its course.
What is there to speculate? If they choose to get rid of one Shichibukai for being useless why would they spare another? What… are the marines just out to get Moria? And lol didn't you mention how some marines would report that Hancock was defeated by Luffy? Dun, dun, dun.....
@brennen:
Because of his personality. He admitted he has nothing against pirates, and that he was just following orders himself back at SA. He's a Government employee, and has shown more care about the cost of a Pacifista than the whimsical attitude of some loose-cannon Warlord. Luffy wasn't even around then, so at best they would roll their eyes at her for the millionth time. Disagree? Re-read the above about her personality, and then below about Rayleigh.
Ok then why wouldn't Sentomaru report how so many of the precious Pacifista were destroyed at her hands, if not because she revealed herself to be a treacherous pirate certainly the aspect in which it connects to his job should be enough reason. Though I'm still not buying that he would just say "I'll let her slide". And if it was so expected of her personality why would he even act shocked and ask her why she was doing it, he should know the answer already.
@brennen:
Rayleigh said, "Bringing to light all the information about the battle at Marineford and then tracing it back, [..] no one would ever imagine that the Government-hating, man-hating Hancock would ride on a Government ship together with a man." I'm no "Creative Writing Major", but I think it's a poor move when an author uses reliable sources of information to pass on false or misleading information (AKA: red herrings). Do you really think Oda would use a person like Rayleigh for such a weak plot twist?
Right after the back part, it then stated that Luffy could be traced back to the route that Hancock took and that's where the trail ends, you truncated that line but that's key information, that just means that if one backtracked Luffy's journey from MHQ all the way to SA there's nothing within his route from SA to ID to MHQ that would incriminate AL. However none of that addresses the issue of her currently hiding Luffy, you see you're misintrepreting that line to mean the current act of Hancock hiding Luffy but you're forgeting that Rayleigh mentions that Kuma told him that the line he pawed Luffy to goes through AL(http://mangastream.com/read/one_piece/71384529/10), which is the key bit of information that the marines are missing to piece together Luffy's trip to AL then to ID leading to his appearance at the war. Again this doesn't solve the problem unbeknownst to Rayleigh that Hancock incriminated herself during the war so my argument stands. So to recap: Rayleigh was trying to reassure Nyon, has no way of knowing that Hancock told Smoker that Luffy was her love (thereby granting information to connect herself to him) and that it was stated by Chopper that all the details of the war had NOT come out yet, it's easy to see that that isn't Rayleigh speaking undeniable gospel. The only way it would seem as a red herring is if one was under this false impression.
And I would find it far worse to be shown multiple scenes of Hancock betraying the marines in front of the marines and nothing coming from it yet we're supposed to regard the threat to her island as serious, and especially when she states the link between herself and Luffy right to Smoker.
@brennen:
Same as above. I consider Garp and Rayleigh to be people in the know. I consider the Newspaper to be similar to the real world's paper: they tell you what they want you to know, when they want you to know it. Get my point?
The point Chopper made about details concerning the war still being worked out and the last bit about why these aren't red herrings.
@brennen:
I don't pretend to, but like I said earlier, we just had the crew declare war on the Government, face a Buster Call, we saw a Buster Call in the flashback, then we went to actual War… all back to back.
What may seem repetitive/unnecessary to some may not seem that way to others, doesn't change what Oda has been depicting in the manga. And I've yet to see an argument that convinces me that my interpretation of the scenes are inaccurate.
@Mugiwara_no_Ice:
I don't understand te debate, when someone as Rayleigh (who clearly has a great deduction skill, see ch503 p17) says that AL is save. + He explains why it's save.
In short Rayleigh didn't know all the details and he isn't god, long explanation see above.
And I still think a medium to large timeskip is unlikely. I don't deny that I can be wrong, as always. 
