No, actually I am correct, and its all there if someone goes back more than a few years to watch the changing of your position in writing.. If you are trying to state that your position has not changed-go right ahead.
Dan, this is about the fourth or fifth time. *Anytime* you definitively attribute that I said something, please put the citation. In the past, my position has never been any more than that *some* of Ueshiba's stuff may have come from sources other than Takeda. The only shift I've made is that actually "aiki" (apparently "aiki" as you use it is slightly different from the traditional usage, so I'm using it in the traditional sense) seems more certainly to have come from Takeda himself simply for the reason that I can see one of Takeda's students using it (and bear in mind, that's not definitive in itself). I still leave it open because I don't know (and you don't know) if the supplemental training methodologies came from Takeda or not. There is still a strong possibility that some of the supplemental training came from another discipline (for Ueshiba's Aikido). Given that Ueshiba uses such strong Shintoism in his supplemental practice methods, it's a reasonable and open question about whether he got some of the supplemental training practices through Omoto Kyo.