I re-read this article:
(From the Aikido Journal by Stanley Pranin)
A couple of thoughts occurred to me while reading the article, which I largely agree with BTW. (Keeping in mind that, as a historian, Stan was drawing his conclusions from facts rather than basing them on beliefs. This, btw, is IMHO his greatest contribution to Aikido. He started a kind of "Enlightenment Period" inviting folks to think critically rather than being mere believers, parishioners, etc.)
Thought #1: Stan quotes Saito sensei stating that there was a difference between O-sensei's demonstrations and his "inside" teaching/training. (I don't doubt this BTW, I had the same experience with my own teacher.) Then Stan goes on to point out a similarity between what Saito sensei taught and the Asahi News film, Budo Renshu and Budo. My thought was, the Asahi news film was meant for public consumption and therefore a demonstration and therefore, by the same logic, would have been different to some degree with what was being taught "inside" at the time. Also, to perhaps a lesser extent, the same could be said of Budo and Budo Renshu. Perhaps Budo Renshu was to be the least public piece and therefore the most accurate reflection of what was actually taught by O-sensei. That would be my guess.
That being said . . .
Thought #2: If the above were so, and if Stan's conclusions based on his extensive (five decades of research, 20 years in Japan, familiarity and ability in the language, access to information and materials that most are not privy to, etc.) are accurate, that O-Sensei is really NOT the father of Modern Aikido . . . perhaps discussion of HIS art is most accurately posted a Non-Aikido Martial Traditions section.
Just a thought . . .