DRUGS AND TERRORISM AND INSULTING ADS

IT WAS ONLY a matter of time: A new television ad campaign suggests that if
you drive a sport -utility vehicle, you are helping terrorism by putting
money in the pockets of oil-producing, terrorism-sponsoring countries like
Saudi Arabia and Iraq. One of the commercials cuts from a man at a gas
station to a map of the Middle East to video footage of a terrorist
training camp, while a little girl's voice says, "These are the terrorists
who get money from those countries every time George fills up his SUV."

The commercials, which started to air on Sunday, are already causing
controversy. Some local television stations have refused to run them
because of concerns about their accuracy. Spokesmen for the auto industry
have been dismissive, and even Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a
leading proponent of tougher fuel efficiency standards, has distanced
himself from the ads' accusatory message.

While I don't drive an SUV, I have little sympathy for anti-SUV rhetoric
which often substitutes a quasi-religious zeal to denounce America's sins
of excessive consumption for facts and reasoned analysis. The ads linking
SUV ownership to terrorism are the latest manifestation of this mindset,
and one can point to numerous problems with their premise.

Drivers of small cars fill up at the same gas pumps as do SUV owners; it's
not just what you drive, it's how much you drive. ("I say if your drive
your offspring to any superfluous activity besides school, you're
supporting terrorism," a friend of mine sarcastically suggested.) Critics
point out that some of the wealthy sponsors of these commercials live in
vast, oil-heated homes, have fleets of cars, and fly private jets.

In one sense, however, the ads are most welcome - as a parody of the even
more ludicrous commercials from the Office of National Drug Control Policy,
which assert that anyone who uses drugs is helping support terrorism.

The "drug money funds terrorism" ad campaign was launched by the government
a year ago. First, there were the ads in which clean-cut teenagers and
young adults stared into the camera saying things like "I helped blow up a
building." A new series of ads, currently on the airwaves, shows two men in
suits discussing the connection between drugs and terrorism. The younger
man, who looks rather clueless, tries to argue that it's a complicated
issue; his older- and wiser-looking companion quickly sets him straight,
and he concludes, "Not that complicated."

It's hard to think of a more blatant insult to the intelligence of the
American public than this crass attempt to exploit the tragedy of Sept. 11
for the antidrug agenda.

Do terrorists sometimes benefit from drug profits? The answer is yes. The
heroin and opium trade in Central Asia has been identified, in particular,
as a source of funding for terrorist groups including the Taliban and Al
Qaeda. But there really is more than one side to this issue. The Taliban
also profited from our war on drugs, receiving $43 million from the US
government in 2001 for the purpose of eradicating Afghanistan's
heroin-producing poppy fields. And whatever one thinks of the various pros
and cons of drug legalization, it's hard to deny that prohibition is what
allows criminal groups, including terrorists, to profit from the drug trade.

Meanwhile, as the Drug Policy Alliance notes, the federal authorities have
yet to come up with conclusive proof of a single case in which proceeds
from drug dealing in the United States went to Middle Eastern terrorists.
And some claims about the drug-terror link are downright misleading. Thus,
drug war zealots have cited evidence that Ecstasy trade has a Middle
Eastern connection, obviously implying a terrorist link. In fact, the
organized crime groups allegedly involved in Ecstasy trafficking consist of
Israelis from the former Soviet Union - who may not be nice guys, of
course, but can hardly be suspected of funneling money to the Al Qaeda.

Surely, Americans who get locked up for growing marijuana plants in their
basements have not given any aid or comfort to international terrorists.
Yet somehow, I doubt that we'll see an ad campaign with the slogan, "Fight
terrorism - grow your own pot!"

In the past two decades, the US government has expended billions of dollars
and untold human effort on the War on Drugs. Just when the terrorist threat
might have made us question the wisdom of this investment, the drug
warriors quickly piggybacked onto the War against Terrorism. Come to think
of it, it's not that complicated.

Cathy Young is a contributing editor at Reason magazine. Her column appears
regularly in the Globe.