I won't bother commenting on most of this, as several times, you see where I am coming from, yet berate me nonetheless; it isn't worth it for me to expend energy on such matters then, nor when you appear to be one of the exact same thing you insult me for. As much as you tell me I'm interpreting facts to my will, you seem to heavily be relying upon the exact same things half the time ("we have to wait for Ishida to explicitly prove/disprove"), and most of your rigid facts appear to be from pure speculation.
1) Here, you practically tell me I'm an idiot. It was stated that the CCG was pinned down from snipers and couldn't move forward. If the ghouls were the ones who were pinned down as you have told me, then the CCG wouldn't have been the ones sitting still in cover. That aside, my thought process? How about, attack the only target wide in the open, who is wearing a CCG armored chest piece so he is clearly an enemy, advancing directly towards us aggressively? Is that in any way wrong to you? Because apparently this is all incorrect to you.
2) It is evident. If it were merely a light cut, it wouldn't need to be stitched immediately, right? Therefore, it's a deeper cut that requires tending to as soon as possible, evident by him sewing it in the middle of a battle. It being the stomach area, a cut anything more than light would mean that it reaches the inner compartment of the body.
3) This isn't actually my opinion even, as some of my comments are. He actually did steal them, as it was explicitly stated, and is even in the wiki. Here, you're just being stubborn and being as pro-Suzuya as possible, to the extent that I believe you are merely making excuses for him whilst enjoying telling me that I am biased.
4) Yes, and unless he throws at lightning speeds propelled by his strength (his agility can't affect a knife's projectile motion mid-air), It is baffling how many high level ghouls were hit by them. Ishida is a human, and no Author in the world is flawless. It is erroneous to believe that everything they do has meaning behind it, or has a perfect explanation behind it.
8) While you tell me I ignorantly jump to conclusions in your point 9, you yourself are being a hypocrite. You can't tell me I'm making baseless accusations that something doesn't exist when it's never been shown to exist. Basically, you're telling me I'm an idiot for saying something isn't there, when it actually hasn't ever been there yet. Baffles me why you felt the need to chastise me here.