Wall Street Urinal "writer" claims WMD were found in Iraq.

[Archae]

The Wall Street Journal's Bret Stephens used the possibility of military intervention in Syria to rewrite the history of the Iraq war, falsely claiming the Bush administration's case against Iraq was supported by solid evidence.

Stephens, the Journal's foreign-affairs columnist and deputy editorial page editor for international opinion pages, criticized the Obama administration's case for intervention in Syria by comparing it to Bush's decision to invade Iraq, which he claimed was made based on "highly detailed" intelligence revealing weapons of mass destruction. Stephens claimed the "testimony of U.N. inspectors like Hans Blix" supported the Bush administration's case for war, and accusations that the Bush administration lied were "libel" and "cheap slander":

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/09/10/wsjs-bret-stephens-rewrites-history-of-iraq-war/195805

Looks like this "writer" during the Iraq invasion was too busy playing with his GI Joe toys.

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. Reading this and seeing his face

I had the really strong urge to "Wow you coulda had a V8" him

[idwiyo]

2. They actually published it? AFTER that Der Spiegel article? ...

[Vogon_Glory]

3. If He Felt So Strongly About The Allegations About Iraqi WMD's, Why Didn't He Enlist?

I lost any ability to believe the blatherings on the Wall Street Journal's editorial page even before the WSJ was taken over by Rupert Murdoch. Nevertheless, I can't help but wonder. If Bret Stephens really felt that Saddam Hussein's regime had WMDs, why didn't he enlist in the US military so he could help find them?

I WIKI'd the dude's birthdate. He was born in 1973, and even at the ripe old age of 30, he was still young enough to enlist.