BLAME OIL, NOT DRUGS

Despite Dexter Ingram's argument that Americans who use narcotics help to
fund terrorists ("Narcotics Helping Terrorists," March 20), it is far more
likely that Americans who drive automobiles help fund them.

It has been well established that both the Taliban and Al Qaeda are largely
funded through Saudi sources. Of course, bin Laden himself is Saudi. Saudi
money has directly funded many of the madrasahs, the Pakistani religious
schools that have served as recruiting grounds for the Taliban. Through
Pakistani sources, they have supported the Taliban. Reportedly, private
Saudi money helps finance Al Qaeda. Saudi money reportedly also has backed
the guerrillas in Georgia and nearby Chechnya, where the Bush
administration now wants to get involved. It even has been suggested that
the Saudis' motive for supporting the Taliban and Central Asian terrorists
is to extend their influence into the Caspian region, where important oil
deposits exist.

Of course, Saudi money comes from oil, which we consume.

Yes, Ingram is correct that the Taliban also have received financing from
the opium trade. What Ingram does not tell you, however, is that this opium
is sold in Europe and Africa, not the United States. Nor does he tell you
that our Northern Alliance allies likewise grow opium. However, despite
Ingram's suggestion, Colombia has no link to bin Laden. (However, the
Colombian rebels are threatening an oil pipeline, which-interestingly-the
Bush administration now wants to protect.)

The oil company-financed Bush administration has been very tight-lipped
about its energy policy for unknown reasons. However, one thing is clear.
If it were serious about cutting off the funding for terrorism, it would be
discouraging oil consumption rather than attacking drugs.

Now that, indeed would be patriotic.

Duncan C. Kinder

St. Clairsville