How conveeeeeenient

I'm sorry, but this doesn't even come close to passing the sniff test. According to the New York Times, the US has found a scientist - who cannot be identified out of fear that he may be sujected to reprisals (from whom?) - who claims that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons up until just a few days before the war, when he destroyed them.

This scientist also claims that he has kept some of the materials used to make these banned weapons, and has supposedly turned these over to the US. As for the rest of the illegal weapons, well, they're in Syria now. Wouldn't you just know it.

Oh! I almost forgot to metion that this scientist also says that, until recently, Saddam was working with al-Qaeda.

Isn't it just great how it all fits together so perfectly? Everyone expected Saddam to use his biological and chemical weapons against our troops, but he didn't. Neither the UN weapons inspectors nor our soldiers have been able to find any chemical or biological weapons. Well, says this scientist, that's because Saddam got rid of the right before you all showed up! Bush seems to be angling for an excuse to attack Syria next. Well, says this scientist, Saddam gave Syria some of those weapons, so they've got them now! Bush claimed that Saddam and al-Qaeda were working together, but hasn't been able to provide any proof. Well, says this scientist, I happen to know that they were!

But wait! There's more!

The Americans said the scientist told them that President Saddam Hussein's government had destroyed some stockpiles of deadly agents as early as the mid-1990's, transferred others to Syria, and had recently focused its efforts instead on research and development projects that are virtually impervious to detection by international inspectors, and even American forces on the ground combing through Iraq's giant weapons plants.

See, aside from this all just being too damn neat and tidy, part of what bothers me is that it just doesn't make sense. Iraq is not known to be a super high-tech country. For them to be working on developing things "impervious" to our ability to detect them seems more than a bit far-fetched. Even worse, why would Saddam want to get rid of what would have to be some of his most effective weapons right before he knows he's going to be invaded? He obviously didn't intend to go down without a fight - and yet he's supposed to have given away or destroyed his most lethal arsenal right before we show up. I honestly can't imagine that he'd be that bent on trying to prove Bush wrong - especially since he knows that if he is killed or overthrown in the war, we're going to have the kind of access necessary to find out if he the stuff anyway.

The Bush administration is going to have to do a lot better than one unnamed scientist who may be able to show them where some components that could possibly be used to make chemical weapons are located, and who has some pretty wild claims, to convince me of much of anything. They've shown on far too many occasions that they're far too willing to stretch the truth - or just make it up wholesale - for me to take anything on "faith". It's a bit of the old "boy who cried wolf" syndrome - tell enough lies, and eventually those who are paying attention won't believe much of anything you have to say.

UPDATE: Hesiod at Counterspin Central has an interesting point on this story as well. There are apparently some in the media and right-wing circles who are trying to use this guy's story as proof that Bush was justified in invading Iraq. Hesiod notes, however, that what this story says is that Saddam was destroying these weapons, which is exactly what we not only wanted him to do, but what we told him he'd have to do in order to avoid being invaded.