Now I know an ad-hominem is ipso facto against HN's rules, but look at not just the Hitler comparison, but the writing style. Disconnected sentences. Run ons.

Now I know an ad-hominem is ipso facto against HN's rules, but look at not just the Hitler comparison, but the writing style. Disconnected sentences. Run ons. This is more than a case of someone who's a bad writer or a non-native English speaker. I've written in non-native languages before -- organization, paragraphs, and spacing transcend language. To not mince words, this blog post seems 50% in the format of one of those crazy political ranters that show up in your inbox, or Timecube ( http://timecube.2enp.com/ http://timecube.2enp.com/ ). Inference-wise, is there a good (>20%) chance this guy's story is legit and he's really just a very, very, jumbled writer. Yes. But is there also a good (>20%) chance this guy is kinda off his rockers? Also yes. This is not meant as an ad-hom itself. It's merely statistical inference (like inferring someone writing about Python but mispelling it as "Pyton" all the time is probably not that proficient at Python)