This results in logical regress: any positive evidence that Nakamoto was a native-English speaking Westerner can be spun into negative evidence of an exceptionally advanced adversary.
In other words, it's "that's just what they want you to think!" logic. And that can be true, but it's not exceptionally convincing.
I find it no more convincing that the whole notion of Bitcoin being some kind of covert CIA (Mossad, FSB, ...) money laundering operation in the first place. If we're willing to go there in the first place, then we should admit that none of the obvious cues are likely to be truthful.
