It would be wonderful if you stated your point instead of just asking open-ended questions that smack of something sinister behind it. In any case, here is what Abe Sensei has said about it: (snipped for relevance)
Here's what you said, Shaun. And it's been discussed before, if you'll look in the archives:
Shaun Ravens wrote:
In my opinion only Abe Sensei is qualified to teach O-Sensei's misogi.
As you're aware (or aware in the past, but seem to have forgotten) Abe Sensei openly stated that there were parts of the training and rituals that O-Sensei did not show him. Your claim for Abe as being the only person qualified to teach O-Sensei's misogi is your own claim, not Abe Sensei's. You may think that you're doing him a favor, but you're not, when you make claims that he does not for himself.
Insofar as the rest of your lengthy spiritual discussion... pass. I still have not seen any direct facts from you yet that relate to the topic at hand. Erick Mead fairly accurately indicated the ways that facts can be presented; your contribution has not fitted in any category. As I've noted several times, all of these things are the same thing.
Even Ueshiba's misogi had to conform in terms of the general baselines, as all these approaches to ki/kokyu must. My suggestion several times has been that if you want to claim that you have special knowledge about these things, surely you can contribute a little about the basics to establish the a foundation for your remarks? And frankly this is the same sort of suggestion I've made for a number of years, Shaun. It's not an insult in a debate to ask someone to establish the basis for his position.
Either you have some facts or you don't. If you don't have any facts, then perhaps you'd consider the possibility that your anger is misplaced if you blame the person asking for the facts?