[bitcoin-dev] Contradiction in BIP65 text?

[xor]

BIP65 [1] says this:
> Motivation
> [...]
> However, the nLockTime field can't prove that it is impossible to spend a
> transaction output until some time in the future, as there is no way to
> know if a valid signature for a different transaction spending that output
> has been created.

I'd interpret "can't prove that it is impossible to spend" = cannot be used 
for freezing funds.

Then later, at "Motivation", it says:
> Freezing Funds
> 
> In addition to using cold storage, hardware wallets, and P2SH multisig
> outputs to control funds, now funds can be frozen in UTXOs directly on the
> blockchain.

This clearly says that funds can be frozen.
Can the BIP65-thing be used to freeze funds or can it not be?

Notice: I am by no means someone who is able to read Bitcoin script. I'm 
rather an end user. So maybe I'm misinterpreting the document?
I'm nevertheless trying to provide a "neutral" review from an outsider who's 
trying to understand whats new in 0.11.2.
You may want to discard my opinion if you think that BIP65 is aimed at an 
audience with more experience.

Greetings and thanks for your work!

[1] 
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/d0cab0379aa50cdf4a9d1ab9e29c3366034ad77f/bip-0065.mediawiki
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151113/81565bca/attachment.sig>