See If You Can Spot the Flaw in this Plan

One of the posters at 9-11 Blogger learns that Noam Chomsky has opened the door a crack to accepting 9-11 Denial:

Chomsky: "It basically comes down to this. We have two choices: (1) devote ourselves to ending the crimes of state, which include those for which 9/11 was a pretext and even more dangerous ones that preceded the pretext, literally threatening species survival; (2) devote ourselves to a debate about the roots of 9/11. The latter course is certainly far easier, but that is not a sufficient reason to reject it. We can, however, be pretty sure that (2) will get nowhere as long as proponents of the Truth Movement theses refuse to take even the first minimal steps towards evaluation of their claims, e.g., submission of a paper to a scientific journal raising questions about the 9/11, the conclusions of the professional society of civil engineers, etc. It cannot be seriously claimed that their reputations would suffer, etc. In fact, this is one of the safest forms of dissidence and activism I know of; the Griffin-Falk examples are typical. But until at least those steps are taken, we can conclude that advocates of the theses are unwilling to submit their claims to evaluation, and it will remain an academic debate without issue."

The blogger suggests:

So lets give him what he wants, can someone contact Dr Steven Jones and ask him to submit his paper to a reputable scientific journal outside that of the “Journal for 9/11 Studies”? This might have already been done by Dr Jones, but to the best of my knowledge it hasn’t for some reason.