My sources? Saotome's own interviews with Aikido Journal. He says that he had to wait five years or so before he could join Hombu Dojo. The year he joined was 1961. Telling the dates accurately isn't the same as being insulting. These are the actual dates.
Isn't it interesting that Stanley predicted outcomes just like this so many years ago?
Isn't it interesting that people are arguing the veracity of what Japanese Shihan said, and are using what Japanese Shihan said to counter it.
So what is the key difference? Stan had cooborating and vetted witness and dates, and too many all agreeing in cross questioning interviews. It blew the lid off the B.S.
In the same vein, if it weren't for Stan wisely taking photos as proof; the Daito ryu scrolls handed out and signed and dated by Ueshiba...would have almost certainly been denied as fictitious. Kisshomaru's revisionist history would have still held sway. It would have remained He said, she said.
But there it was; Morihei Ueshiba, teaching Daito ryu and awarding mokuroko all the way up to 1939.
What does it really say that it took so much digging to hear the truth?
All the best