I think that we (in the generic sense) have been laying out an increasingly detailed argument (with more to come) for the Ueshiba connection.
But, that aside, why do our arguments of what Ueshiba meant bother you when you yourself can give no substantiation for your statements as to the goals of Aikido?
Aikido has grown way beyond Ueshiba. If you're interested only in Ueshiba that is fine, but the Aikido community has grown and changed in the last 50 years or so. What you are saying is analogous to every painter trying to copy and continue what, say, Matisse did. Matisse was great, and showed us lot's of things, but he's not the end of painting. Proving what Ueshiba said or didn't say doesn't change anything. Aikido is not a Koryu, it is a living system.
Frankly I have no idea if what you think Ueshiba was getting at was right wrong or indifferent. I'll let you and the historians hash that one out. But the Aikido community outside of the internet, that I speak with, doesn't sound like the picture you are painting (pun intended).