That Nick Harris chappie either genuinely believes what he says, doesn't think there's anything to disprove it, or is playing semantics. I suspect the third.
I think he's on safe ground when arguing that FFP was not targeted at City/PSG - they were happy collateral collected up in the regs to rein in New Money Clubs. Where 'happy collateral' may mean 'examples of intended targets'. I think he's arguing the semantics that it was designed for two clubs, rather than a broad group which just oh-so-coincidentally includes those clubs.
He's got a real bee in his bonnet with PB though, who has apparently brainwashed loads of people.