I find it unfair to blame the use of pieces of sentences taken out of their context by students of a teacher who was notorious for his long, complex explanations. I don't buy the idea that O Sensei blew smoke in the face of his students for hours for no reason.
Actually, the internviews state that none of them understood those lectures. I think Stan Pranin and later, Peter Goldsbury covered their lack of understanding of his lectures fairly well. Considering that the majority of the famous prewar students only studied with him for 6 to 8 years, and they were usually young men, it is understandable. The fact that none of them displayed his power throughout their life is further proof that they never captured an understanding of his skill. So we can wonder just what they missed, and if his long explanations would have been any help at all.
Personally, I have found explanations without hands on instruction almost meaningless, but if you consistently see large numbers of students who never captured, equaled or surpassed what the teacher is doing then that is rather telling of a problem or disconnect in the teacher / student model. If a disconnect is consistent among a large number of students from a single source, I would look to that teacher. We have to couple that with the documented fact that post war modern aikido is Tohei / Kissomaru based and not the founder.