Sorry, you don't get off that easily. The "blatant lie" could not be produced, so now you change it around to being ambiguous and implied. You're wrong. It's ok. You can admit it. It won't hurt.
The chronology is thus:
At reply #55 at LibertPost:
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readarticle.cgi?101+6114#C187
Marine Inspector states he sees his FR account has been reactivated. He then receives comments from other posters who clearly assume he had been banned and reinstated. That understanding was never corrected my Marine Inspector. In fact he assures one respondent that "this" (meaning Liberty Post for those of you who can't follow trains of thought) is his home now. In fact, I just re-read some of that thread and that impression was cultivated by Marine Inspector, though he does not explicitly say he was banned. There is no way to deny that is the impression he wanted to convey.
Then you get to his reply #105 on that same thread where he says:
I just posted this on TOS.
Lets see how long it lasts. And how long I last.
Now, clearly he wanted to stir the pot over here. Fine and well, but what's with the wide-eyed "I only want to stir discussion" garbage? Plus he again implies he'll be banned, thus massaging his earlier implication that he was reinstated now after a banning.
See?
No such posts exist. You're stretching. Keep trying though. The "blatant lie" cannot be found.
Your bias is showing btw. No such impression was conveyed. In fact when he first went over there after the SB incident, he stated clearly that he had left on his own accord and had his account deleted. That doesn't sound like someone that is trying to mislead people. This is how rumors get started.