What regularization are you talking about?Feel free to think so, I have doubt that this is a valid result. I would say that there exist some regularizations which will show Hawking radiation. This is what has to be expected if the regularized picture is non-static. Instead, regularizations where the regularized black hole is static do not show Hawking radiation.
The point being that the surface of the star actually falls behind the horizon, its just that the observer at infinity can't observe this because of his peculiar time.The point being? Once we talk about Hawking radiation, we talk about radiation observable to a far away observer. So, why would the nearby infalling observer matter at all?
Hawking radiation doesn't originate at the horizon!A nice argument that there cannot be any Hawking radiation for a longer period of time.
Outside the horizon of a black hole is not a trans-Planckian region. Its not even a high curvature region if the black hole is massive enough.And that it uses quite nonsensical assumptions about the validity of the calculation in horribly trans-Planckian regions is completely clear too.