Peter A Goldsbury
Yes, I am aware of this. However, I think that suggestions of a cover-up and conspiracy become much harder to demonstrate.
To me, talk of a conspiracy / cover-up suggests that someone, Kisshomaru Ueshiba, for example, actually knew all the time that his father's Daito-ryu training was really far, far more important than his connections with Omoto, but he deliberately chose to downplay or suppress the former, in order that people would (erroneously) believe that the latter was more important: in other words, systematic lying took place on a major scale.
I do not believe that such a serious moral lapse can be demonstrated, even from Stanley Pranin's research.
In your post, you mention Daito-ryu and Takeda as the major factor, rather than a major factor (which is what I myself believe). So I think you need to show more evidence than you have done so far.
I agree that a deliberate cover up by one or two individuals is hard to demonstrate. In fact, I'm not at all sure why there was a "changing", a "slant", or a "cover up" to the martial history of Ueshiba.
When Kisshomaru took over, it was definitely a struggling, hard time in the post WWII aftermath. I wouldn't be surprised to see anyone overplay the spiritual aspects of Aikido in that time.
But, something happened. Events were changed. Published books up to the early 90s dealing with Takeda and Daito ryu either majorly downplayed, lied, or slanted the truth to the point that Daito ryu was just one minor martial art of many that Ueshiba studied. We now know that Daito ryu was the main martial influence on Ueshiba.
Discounting the spiritual side, can you elaborate on why you believe Takeda and Daito ryu are only a
major factor? Was there another martial art that was a major factor in Ueshiba's training?