I not only suspect the majority of English translations of OSensei's writing, but the origin of those writings. I've heard from several sources, for example, that the doka were not so much written by OSensei, as written down as examples of things that he would/might say...
I t is always easy to disavow points one does not like by merely attacking their authenticity without actual attribution of a source of error in transmission. So why should you do that -- who says so?
More to the point -- why trust the Japanese either? Most of them were transcriptions of what he said, rather than his own writing. The entirety of the Takemusu Aiki lectures was transcribed stenographically as he gave it. Budo Renshu has the distinction of being one of his two major pieces of actual extended writing on the subject, so at least one source of error is removed. What basis do you have to question Bieri and Mabuchi's translation?