> Todd reportedly denied he was the bitcoin creator: "Of course I'm not Satoshi," he said.
That and various other evidence (coding style, british-english spelling) has suggested to me for a long time that it's an older gentleman from the UK, likely with an academic background in economics or related distributed systems. I don't know either way, but it seems borderline libel to suggest without much more substantial evidence that it's Peter Todd.
That said, Satoshi was clearly extremely diligent in concealing their identity, and so they may well have purposefully decided to use a headline that they wouldn't have had ordinary access too-- when someone is trying to conceal themselves it creates an environment which is hostile to logical reasoning. Any point which could point one direction might instead point the opposite or in a random direction.
Maybe, that claim is pretty speculative and shouldn't be repeated as established fact.
I agree with the rest of your points, though there were a lot of proxies other than tor. In particular, there were well known forums you could post on to get private proxies -- often used for kinda shady astroturfing and similar. So excluding tor alone isn't sufficient. Tor wouldn't have been as useful for Satoshi's bitcoin usage because he couldn't run a node over it that accepted inbound connections.