DOES PETROLEUM ADDICTION SUPPORT TERROR?

Editor:

Ronnie Oliver's letter (Sept. 28) parallels the current White House
drug-control strategy, portraying casual illicit drug users as unpatriotic
and somehow responsible for Sept. 11. This carries forward the same failed
efforts at drug prevention as the "Reefer Madness" campaign of the 1930s.

Marijuana is by far the most popular illegal substance. Smokers know it is
primarily home-grown in the United States and imported from Canada or
Mexico, so the White House approach is likely to have little effect on its
consumption.

Its prohibition, however, does help promote organized crime here and abroad.
Opium production clearly occurs in Afghanistan, and one could assume that is
helping fund the terrorists.

Fifteen of the hijackers of 9/11, as well as Osama bin Laden, were from
Saudi Arabia and the countries preaching the most hateful anti-American
message. Those countries have the majority of the world's oil.

Most of their money is coming from our unstoppable addiction to petroleum. I
see no effort by officials to portray drivers of SUVs as unpatriotic,
although their negative effects on our country and planet are many.

Will the patriotic $3.2 million advertising campaign cause a heroin addict
to put down the needle? The chances are about as good as a Texas oil man
trading in his Cadillac Escalade for a Chevy Metro.

Steve Evans,

Crete, Neb.