Well, the point I was making in my previous post must have been overlooked, since the post got its own thread space.
I'll detail it a bit more on what I meant in that post ...
Watching the video, there is a definite look about the techniques to what some people do in aikido. Very, very close. So, what makes aikido Aikido must go beyond mere techiques. Even more so, Aikido must go beyond mere use of aiki in a jujutsu fashion. After all, one of the founders of these arts was filmed doing demos that had "internal" principles. Which then brings up the question again of what makes aikido Aikido?
I've struggled with this question for years. Personally I've found a definition of "aiki" that I'm comfortable with, a group I like to train with, and principles that I can understand. This clarity has come with greater understanding of what I think "Aikido" actually is, and I'm afraid that I have rejected it. My view of aiki is much more closely aligned with the older understanding from kenjutsu, Daito Ryu and Yanagi Ryu. This change in the meaning of aiki is specifically what I feel makes Aikido actually different from the arts that came before it. Therefore, if you dont' believe in that change, and it is the defining feature of the art, I do not believe you can consider what you are doing to be the same. I refer to what I do now as "aikibudo" or just "jujutsu" because I don't really think what I'm doing is Aikido. But then, I don't think many people are actually doing Aikido as I would define it. For a bit more in depth discussion, see this thread.