--- Begin Message ---
Hmmm.. so are these sleazebucket Nazis looking to criminalize any
(non-govt-approved-propaganda) "drug related information" on the
internet? That seems the way the Law is going in the U.S.... pro-active
policing, which seeks to criminalize raw information, with a presumtion of
intent. Be it bomb making recipes, drug information, what have
you. What's next, criticizing the government?
Nazi bastards! Death to the New World Order!
-Max
----------------------------
[a designated evil: "Advocates of an expanded freedom of expression" (see
below!)]
Drugs and the Internet
An Overview of the Threat to America's Youth
U.S. Department of Justice Propaganda Piece
www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs/682/index.htm
Publication Date: December 2001
Document ID: 2002-R0430-001
This report is an overview of the threat that certain Internet websites
pose to adolescents and young adults in the United States. It focuses on
websites that promote or facilitate the production, use, and sale of MDMA,
GHB, and LSD, three significant "club drugs".
Your questions, comments, and suggestions for future subjects are welcome
at any time. Addresses are provided at the end of the page.
Contents
Executive Summary
Project Background
The Internet: The Emergence of an Information Superhighway
The Nature of the Threat
The Location of the Threat
Identifying Individuals/Groups
Drug Production and the Internet
Drug Use and the Internet
Drug Sales and the Internet
Internet Sampling
Legal Issues: Challenges Facing Policymakers and Law Enforcement
Project Continuation
List of Tables
Table 1. Drug-Related Information Elements on Offending Websites
Executive Summary
This report is an overview of the threat that certain Internet websites
pose to adolescents and young adults in the United States. This preliminary
baseline is intended to assist policymakers in countering this threat to
America's youth. This report focuses on websites that promote or facilitate
the production, use, and sale of MDMA, GHB, and LSD, three significant
"club drugs." A full strategic assessment addressing the Internet drug
threat in greater depth will follow this overview report. In producing the
strategic assessment, NDIC will coordinate with the Drug Enforcement
Administration and other federal law enforcement agencies as appropriate.
The assessment's descriptions and analysis will provide a more
comprehensive view of the status and magnitude of Internet activity and
will be provided to national-level policymakers and law enforcement
personnel to further their understanding of this threat.
An increasing number of adolescents and young adults in the United States,
with ready access to information, services, and contacts through the
Internet, are contributing to the U.S. drug problem by engaging in various
types of illegal and harmful behavior. Internet use has grown rapidly in
this country, and an estimated 85 percent of Americans aged 12-24 now use
the Internet regularly. The large number of younger Americans accessing the
Internet has encouraged legitimate and illegitimate
entrepreneurs--including drug offenders--to market and sell their products
to young people through this powerful medium. Many websites, newsgroups,
bulletin boards, and chat rooms promote the drug culture by providing a
wide variety of information on drugs and drug paraphernalia. Law
enforcement efforts in identifying illegal Internet activities are a
challenge because information can be exchanged and sales consummated
quickly and with relative anonymity. Drug offenders are increasingly taking
advantage of sophisticated encryption and security technologies to hide
their actions and identities, and much of the activity that can be
discovered appears to be constitutionally protected as free speech.
Information about the production, use, and sale of MDMA, GHB, and LSD is
widely available on the Internet. Although most MDMA production now occurs
outside the United States, the potential exists for expanded production in
the country, including by American youth. GHB is increasingly being
produced in the United States, and many young producers use recipes they
find on the Internet. Young persons who use "club drugs" or are
contemplating their use can readily access information about them on
Internet websites, including explanations of drug terminology, methods of
use, and dangers associated with use. Many of these websites popularize and
glamorize drug use, and others implicitly promote use and experimentation.
Because MDMA, GHB, and LSD are Schedule I controlled substances, their sale
is not often advertised on the Internet. However, suppliers and customers
often meet through Internet bulletin boards and chat rooms and arrange the
sale of drugs or chemicals, which are then shipped to the customer for an
agreed price.
Addresses
National Drug Intelligence Center 319 Washington Street, 5th Floor
Johnstown, PA 15901
Tel. (814) 532-4601 FAX (814) 532-4690 E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
National Drug Intelligence Center 8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1001 McLean,
VA 22102-3840
Tel. (703) 556-8970 FAX (703) 556-7807
Web Addresses
ADNET: http://ndicosa DOJ: http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/
LEO: http://home.leo.gov/tfa/drugs/drugs.htm
Project Background
Focus
The National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC) will assess the use of the
Internet to facilitate the production, sale, and use of drugs and drug
paraphernalia. NDIC has drafted a set of specific and focused intelligence
requirements, which define the project scope. The assessment will
concentrate on Internet websites that do the following:
Display information intended to facilitate the production or cultivation of
federally scheduled, nonprescription drugs Display information intended to
facilitate the use of federally scheduled, nonprescription drugs Facilitate
the sale of federally scheduled, nonprescription drugs and drug paraphernalia.
To focus on the issue of drug activity among adolescents and young adults
in the United States, this initial report addresses the requirements as
they pertain to three significant "club drugs": MDMA, GHB, and LSD. NDIC's
follow-on strategic assessment will address the requirements as they
pertain to these and other drugs in greater detail.
Internet Parameters
This project examines registered domains (web addresses controlled by laws
of the registering country and sold to webmasters for a fee, usually
annual) and subdomains (subsections of the registered domain that a
webmaster, in turn, allows other webmasters to use for a fee or for free).
Newsgroups and open bulletin boards are included in the scope.
To provide context, this report discusses, when relevant, the threat posed
by use of email, chat rooms, list servers, and non-website communications
such as File Transfer Protocol (FTP) and Telnet. However, these media are
not included in the project scope because they are difficult to monitor and
virtually impossible to quantify given their vast use and the fact that
tracking is negligible and can be done only at the individual server or
Internet Service Provider (ISP) level.
The project scope includes both domestic- and foreign-based websites,
because the Internet is a global platform virtually unconstrained by
boundaries and jurisdictions. However, the scope is limited to websites in
English, because expanding the scope to websites in other languages would
have necessitated the use of translators, both to develop Internet search
strings with foreign words and phrases and to collect pertinent information
from the Internet and other sources. Limiting the scope to English websites
is not expected to significantly affect the project's findings.
Research Methodology
When conducting research in support of this project, NDIC has used a
"non-investigative" and "non-intrusive" approach. To ensure compliance with
the Privacy Act, NDIC did not collect information on specific individuals.
In addition, NDIC has collected only publicly available information and has
not engaged in communication with persons or websites. This conservative
research approach will continue as the project progresses.
The Internet: The Emergence of an Information Superhighway
The Internet 1 has revolutionized communications worldwide. The invention
of the telegraph, telephone, radio, and computer set the stage for this
unprecedented integration of capabilities. The Internet is at once a
world-wide broadcasting capability, a mechanism for information
dissemination, and a medium for collaboration and interaction between
individuals and their computers without regard to geographic location.2
Variously referred to as the National Information Infrastructure or the
information superhighway, the Internet serves today as the nation's primary
medium for the exchange of news, mail, and general information, and is
rapidly becoming a principal hub of commercial and banking activity as well.
In 1962, the genesis of what later became the Internet was conceived as a
decentralized computer network, able to withstand a nuclear attack and
ensure the survival of military command and control systems. The prototype
network took 7 years to develop. In 1969, the Internet was born as an
aggregate of four computer networks located at three universities and one
research facility. Over the next 30 years, the Internet grew exponentially.
There were over 100 million Internet users in the United States in 2000,
and that number is expected to reach 177 million in the United States and
500 million worldwide by 2003. Electronic commerce has emerged as a new
sector of the global economy, accounting for greater than $100 billion in
sales during 2000, which is more than double the amount in 1999. By 2003,
electronic commerce is anticipated to exceed $1 trillion.3
Minors and young adults have become the largest segment of the U.S.
population with Internet access. A 2000 study released by the Ipsos Reid
Group showed that 85 percent of Americans aged 12-24 used the Internet
regularly, compared to 59 percent of the rest of the adult population. The
85 percent participation rate among U.S. youth was higher than the rate in
nine other industrialized countries.4 About 30 million American children
under 18 currently use the Internet, and more than 40 million are expected
to be online by 2005.5 To Top To Contents
Endnotes
1. The Internet refers to the global information system that (1) is
logically linked together by a globally unique address space based on the
Internet Protocol (IP) or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons; (2) is able
to support communications using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet
Protocol (TCP/IP) suite or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons, and/or
other IP-compatible protocols; and (3) provides, uses, or makes accessible,
either publicly or privately, high-level services layered on the
communications and related infrastructure described herein. Source: Barry
M. Leiner et al., A Brief History of the Internet, URL:
<http://www.isco.org/Internet/history/brief.html> accessed 3 April 2001.
The World Wide Web, the set of all websites in the world, rides on the
Internet.
2. Barry M. Leiner et al., A Brief History of the Internet, URL:
<http://www.isco.org/Internet/history/brief.html>, accessed 3 April 2001.
Verbatim.
3. National Institute for Government Innovation, International Summit on
Cyber Crime, promotional material, received by NDIC in February 2001.
4. Ipsos Reid Group, American youth global Internet pacesetters, URL:
http://www.canalipsos.com/english/articles_gb/0005/y_Internet.htm, accessed
3 April 2001. American youth surpassed those in Australia, South Korea, the
United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, Spain, France, Japan, and Argentina in
Internet use.
5. Grunwald Associates, News Release - Children, Families, and the
Internet, URL: http://www.grunwald.com/survey/newsrelease.html, accessed 10
April 2001.
The Nature of the Threat
The Internet differs from other information media in part because
information can be disseminated at will to a specific or wide audience;
because information exchange occurs very quickly, easily, and
inexpensively; and because information providers and users can often
protect their privacy. The openness of the Internet, its global reach, and
its ease of access have encouraged many individuals and groups to use the
medium to promote or facilitate illicit drug activities. The threat
perpetuated by these individuals and groups as it relates to adolescents
and young adults in the United States can be defined and circumscribed by
the following:
The threat to adolescents and young adults in the United States accessing
the Internet consists of information, disseminated by drug offenders or
others, that is intended to facilitate the production, use, or sale of
federally scheduled, nonprescription drugs. Information facilitating
production includes explanations of equipment or other resources needed or
processes used. Information facilitating use includes explanations of the
nature, effects, or administration methods of drugs. Information
facilitating sales includes explanations of how or where drugs may be
obtained or mechanisms allowing for online purchase of drugs.
The Information Purveyors
Information available on the Internet is generated by individuals and
groups with varied agendas and motivations. Sources of information include
the following:
Drug offenders use the Internet to expand their customer base by inducing a
young audience to engage in illegal or harmful behavior. These drug
offenders may act either singly or as part of a conspiracy. They also may
use the Internet to induce a young audience to engage in criminal
activities related to drug trafficking, as well as other offenses such as
credit card fraud and other financial crimes.
Drug-culture advocates are chiefly interested in expanding the size of the
community to both legitimize their activity and increase pressure on
lawmakers to change or abolish drug control laws. These individuals and
groups share information via the Internet to demonstrate the ease with
which drugs can be produced, trafficked, and obtained. They may or may not
be drug offenders themselves and may or may not induce others to engage in
harmful or illegal behavior, but they often glamorize drug use and extol
the virtues of illegal substance abuse.
Advocates of an expanded freedom of expression are purveyors of information
with yet another agenda. These individuals and groups publish information
on the Internet to push the boundaries of self-expression and the First
Amendment. The information they provide may induce minors and young adults
to break drug laws or to become a danger to themselves or to others by
abusing illegal drugs.
Anarchist individuals and groups, who protest against or seek to abolish
current legal, social, or economic structures, disseminate drug information
on the Internet to advance their cause by promoting countercultural
behavior. They may induce others to disobey drug laws as a part of their
worldview, or drug abuse may be an implied undercurrent of their lifestyle.
The presence of these individuals and groups on the Internet is a known fact.
Other lawbreakers use drug websites to encourage minors to perpetrate
crimes unrelated to drugs or to lure them into being victims of crime.
Pornographers and pedophiles would fit this threat group.
The Location of the Threat
The unrestrained nature of the Internet makes the threat's location a very
complex matter. Potentially harmful information contained on websites may
be static one moment and moving across the network the next. Information
transmitted over the Internet can move in whole or in part through a series
of interim points in very rapid succession. This state of flux is a
function of the architecture of the Internet and of the manner in which the
information itself is physically subdivided for transmission.
Large web-based documents are not transmitted as single units through the
Internet. Instead, internetted computers break down information into
smaller units called packets, to speed their handling and delivery.
Generally, control devices called routers direct these packets by
identifying the shortest or least congested pathways between the origin and
destination. Once packets leave a router, they travel through multiple
paths on the Internet backbone before being reassembled at the ISP's server
for ultimate delivery to the end user. A personal computer (PC) or other
Internet-ready device, equipped with the appropriate communication software
and hardware, downloads the information and then interprets and displays it
through a browser (e.g., Internet Explorer or Netscape Navigator) or stores
it for later access by other software applications. All these processes,
occurring "behind the computer screen" as it were, are transparent to the
end user.
There are at least three physical points on the Internet where the location
of potentially harmful information can be pinpointed:6
At the insertion point, where the website's creator originates the
information and uploads it to the World-Wide Web. This insertion point
usually corresponds to the personal computer system where the author
designed the website.7 At the point where the website is stored, or
hosted--typically, at the web server of the user's ISP, or at a third-party
web hosting company. At the point where the end user receives the
information--typically, at the end user's personal computer, Internet
appliance, or other Internet-ready device.
Identifying the insertion point and the hosting point can be difficult,
because geographical addresses and Internet addresses of websites can be
obscured through a variety of software or hardware techniques. However, if
a website containing potentially harmful information is open and accessible
to all Internet users, then the geographical location of the router
supporting the website can be pinpointed by tracing the path the
information stream follows between its origin and destination points. This
trace will yield the specific location of the router nearest to the web
server hosting the website that contains the potentially harmful
information. The router's location therefore will indicate the general
geographical vicinity of the web server, since routers support servers in
designated geographical regions.
Identifying the point where the end user receives the information would
involve more intrusive means of information collection, and even then
results may vary according to how the user accesses the Internet. If a PC
were used, its location could be ascertained by examining the ISP's
customer records (which would require a subpoena) or by using a Title III
wiretap (which would require a court order). Establishing that the end
user's system had been the recipient of such information could be done
using computer forensic searches (which would require a search warrant).
However, identifying the right system, at the right place, and at the right
time using any of these methods would in most cases require a human
intelligence tip or a security lapse on the part of the end user.8
Endnotes
6. Only for information that is meant for general, unsecured, and
unobstructed dissemination.
7. If the user is using an "Internet appliance" instead of a PC to access
the Internet, there will be no legacy data (files or fragments of files
created by the computer while processing any kind of information) at the
insertion point because an "Internet appliance" lacks a hard drive.
8. If the end user were using a stationary Internet appliance, there would
be no legacy data in the user's equipment to search forensically. Also, if
the user were accessing the Internet though a mobile device, especially one
attached to a cellular modem, locating the end user would be extremely
difficult, requiring very specific information developed through case work
and the use of advanced technology.
Identifying Individuals/Groups
The ability of drug offenders to successfully evade law enforcement is
determined partly by their level of technical sophistication, which
includes their ability to hide, mask, and move sites. It is very possible
that the individuals/groups most easily identified and caught by law
enforcement are also the least technically savvy or "Internet smart." They
also may be the ones involved in less significant drug activities;
offenders with more to lose are likely to use more advanced methods to
"cover their tracks."
Drug offenders are now using the same encryption and security technology
that protects Internet commerce to keep drug activities hidden from
investigators' eyes.9 New software and hardware tools recently developed by
the computer industry allow individuals and groups to impede law
enforcement attempts to penetrate their communications. These developments
include anonymous email remailing, encryption software, and Internet
telephony.10 Most individuals maintaining pro-drug websites provide a
disclaimer, which they believe shields them from law enforcement scrutiny.
When these disclaimers appear on websites that contain a great amount of
information promoting the drug culture and the use of illegal substances,
it can be inferred that the disclaimers lack sincerity.
In many cases, drug offenders operate websites on subdomains, space which
registered domain owners give or lease to others for personal use. Drug
offenders also operate on domains that are registered in another country,
which means their websites are not subject to U.S. law. However,
individuals and groups that operate websites on their own registered
domains often can be identified. To acquire a registered domain, a person
must provide some personal information that may include name, business,
address, phone number, and credit card number. This information, which is
posted publicly on the Internet, can help law enforcement identify or
physically locate a person, assuming the information is not fictitious.
Registered domains have to be paid for, usually on an annual basis, and
payments usually provide a direct link to a person.
Endnotes
9. Jim Krane, "Narcs Online: Cops Chase Drugs Onto the Net," URL:
<APBNews.com>, accessed on 22 September 1999.
10. National Gang Threat Assessment, National Alliance of Gang
Investigators Associations, February 2000, p. 16.
Drug Production and the Internet
The Internet provides access to a vast amount of information on drug
production, including processes, recipes, ingredients, and substitutes, and
this information is readily available to minors and young adults in the
United States with Internet access. Misinformation is fairly common and can
lead to serious injury, illness, or death.11 Production equipment also is
advertised widely, and chemicals needed in the production process are
available as well.12 Even the most inexperienced drug producer can easily
obtain the instructions, ingredients, and equipment needed to synthesize
many illegal drugs in a kitchen, bathroom, or basement laboratory.13
MDMA
Although most MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine) is produced outside
the United States,14 the potential exists for expanded production in the
country, including by American youth. MDMA production is somewhat difficult
but still within the capabilities of many young people, assuming they can
obtain the necessary precursor chemicals.15 MDMA is synthesized from
several precursor chemicals, most of which are federally controlled.
Producers can use the Internet to identify suppliers of these chemicals and
to obtain recipes and instructions on MDMA production. Many websites simply
post a description of the MDMA production process published by Alexander
and Ann Shulgin in their book Phenethylamines I Have Known And Loved: A
Chemical Love Story (a.k.a. "PIHKAL"), or else provide a hyperlink to a
website that posts the description. Alternate methods for synthesizing MDMA
and its analogs, such as MDA, are easily found on the Internet.
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) reports the arrest of two
chemistry doctoral students, one in Georgia and one in Arizona, who used
instructions from the Internet to produce MDMA, methamphetamine, and
precursor chemicals. The students communicated with each other about their
progress via email.16
GHB
GHB (gamma-hydroxybutyrate) is increasingly being produced in the United
States,17 and the production process is considered to be very easy.18 The
precursor GBL (gamma-butyrolactone), although a controlled chemical,19 can
be purchased over the Internet. The recipes available on the Internet for
GHB production are not nearly as standardized as those for MDMA. Incorrect
information is relatively common, and as a result, some sites explain how
to tell the difference between "fake" and "real" GHB recipes. Some GHB
information is exchanged on pro-drug and fitness websites, including
information on production processes and ways to obtain GHB production kits
and chemicals.
Newsgroup posting: "I need some answers in a hurry. 3 DEA agents showed up
at my door today with a box which they say contained GBL addressed to
me….First, is GBL illegal to receive in the mail, Second, Can they trace it
to me, and finally if they can what should I say."
Newsgroup responses: "If you bought it as a cleaner, nail polish remover or
wood stripper you can claim ignorance to it being a controlled substance."
"…try to play ignorant and say that you have a lot of furniture you're
trying to refinish and needed some stripper that wasn't toxic….get rid of
any bottles of NaOH20….that way, they wouldn't have hard evidence in case
of a search that you were trying to synthesize GHB."21
LSD
LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide) synthesis is a complex chemical procedure
that requires the knowledge and skills of a trained chemist.22 However,
recipes for making LSD still are readily available on the Internet, often
via hyperlinks to instructions from another Shulgin book, Tryptamines I
Have Known And Loved: The Continuation (a.k.a. "TIHKAL"). LSD production
instructions often warn that production should be undertaken by experienced
chemists only and that the precursor and essential chemicals are difficult
to obtain. Other sites, however, provide instructions for making LSD using
substances that contain the LSD precursor ergine (lysergic acid amide).23
Endnotes
11. "Internet Highway: Road to Enlightenment or Danger?" NDIC, 23 August 2000.
12. The chemical industry, which incurs an enormous cost savings in
processing orders online, expects 80% of its business will be on the
Internet by 2005 ("Internet Resources for Clandestine Drug Manufacture,"
presentation at National Chemical Initiative Training, Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) Western Lab senior chemist, September 11-12, 2000).
13. "Internet's easy access feeds drugs to 'pill-popping culture'’,"
Washington Times, 21 February 2001, p. A11.
14. Joint Assessment of MDMA Trafficking Trends, 2000-L0352-001, NDIC, July
2000.
15. DEA chemist interview, conducted by NDIC, 10 May 2001. MDMA production
is generally considered to be more difficult than methamphetamine production.
16. Drug Intelligence Brief: Drug Traffickers in Cyberspace, DEA
Headquarters Intelligence Division, December 1999.
17. National Drug Threat Assessment 2001 - The Domestic Perspective, NDIC,
October 2000; Terrance Woodworth, former Deputy Director, Office of
Diversion Control, DEA, Testimony before the House Commerce Committee,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, 11 March 1999.
18. DEA chemist interview, conducted by NDIC, 10 May 2001.
19. Controlled as a List I chemical in legislation signed by the U.S.
President on February 18, 2000 ("GHB: The Stone Cold Truth - Laws,
Legislation, Legalities", www.ashesonthesea.com/ghb/laws.htm, 21 December,
2000).
20. The chemical abbreviation for sodium hydroxide.
21. URL: <alt.drugs.ghb> newsgroup, actual message posted at URL:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr…ic=1&th=e82ade7b44f43ead&seekd=902943420>,
accessed on 12 April 2001.
22. DEA chemist interview, conducted by NDIC, 10 May 2001.
23. Drug Identification Bible. 4th ed. Edited by Tim Marnell. Grand
Junction, CO: Amera-Chem, Inc., 1999.
Drug Use and the Internet
The Internet has a vast repository of information on the effects of drug
use and co-use, as well as explanations of drug terminology, methods of
administration, and warnings.24 Minors and young adults in the United
States can find information about any drug that they are using or thinking
of using on Internet websites. Many of these websites openly promote drug
use, others glamorize the drug culture and thereby implicitly promote use
and experimentation. More and more websites are being established to cater
to the youth party scene, serving as pointers to the next rave or nightclub
gathering where illegal drugs are often sold and used.25
MDMA
MDMA use is promoted and glamorized on many pro-drug websites and bulletin
boards, and discussions of the administration of MDMA by itself or in
combination with other drugs are readily available. Drug legalization and
club/party websites often describe MDMA as a relatively benign drug with
few negative side effects, while at the same time providing warnings to
potential users. These warnings include the fact that harmful substitutes
are often marketed as MDMA, and that MDMA use can result in dehydration.
Users are encouraged to test pills before ingesting them and to properly
rehydrate themselves afterwards. Websites occasionally give information on
vitamins and food supplements that some MDMA users believe are helpful in
preventing negative side effects. Most websites promoting MDMA use also
provide hyperlinks to other sources of information on the Internet.26
Newsgroup posting: "It's like warm electricity flowing through your whole
body. You feel relaxed, connected to everyone around you, empathetic, and
usually like dancing. :) Every touch is an experience….Your first time, it
could last anywhere from 6-8 hours, or hell, even more, if you use 5-HTP
and the like (myself or someone else could post instructions on that if you
are interested). In most places, the average cost is $20 per pill, but as
you do it more, you will probably get more 'connected' and be able to get
it for less (I've gotten it as low as $3 before… well worth the drive!!).
When you do it, be SURE you stay hydrated, and take time to cool off if you
start feeling way too hot. Dehydration and overheating are the main dangers
associated with E."27
GHB
GHB likewise is portrayed as a relatively benign drug on many Internet
websites, usually with the caveat that correct dosing is extremely
important. Addiction and the possibility of overdoses and death are
generally downplayed, and the use of GHB in drug-facilitated rape is often
dismissed as media hype. On some pro-drug and fitness websites, GHB is
promoted as an athletic performance enhancer, an antidepressant, and a
sleep aid. These websites also discuss using GHB substitutes, such as
"Renewtrient" and "Verve," that are said to mimic the effects of GHB.
However, there are some popular pro-drug websites that more accurately
describe the dangers of GHB use and do not openly promote its use.
Newsgroup posting: "I take two teaspoons and feel very calm and a little
euphoria…three teaspoons makes the feeling go up a pretty good notch to
slightly drunk and causes me to get very communicative…I like to get
sincere and deep with those around me…One thing I have noticed is how vivid
my dreams get while or after taking G…No kidding…I almost feel as though
the dreams are actually happening."28
LSD
Extensive information on the use of LSD is available on the Internet.
Historical information on LSD use in the 1950s and 1960s is found on many
sites, including information on the experimental use of the drug on
patients treated by psychiatrists and mental health professionals during
those years. Although information available on LSD websites often indicates
the drug has no potential for physical or psychological addiction, most
sites warn that users may experience "bad trips" and recommend using LSD in
familiar settings in the company of trusted friends. Information about how
much LSD to take is frequently presented, including the differences between
psycholitic dosing (taking 75-200 micrograms) and psychedelic dosing
(taking 500 micrograms or more). Discussions about the psychological
dangers, flashbacks, and insomnia often associated with LSD use are common
as well. Some websites list other hallucinogens that produce effects
similar to LSD without the risk of flashbacks. Internet bulletin boards
provide an interactive, conversational setting for individuals to share LSD
"tripping" experiences.
Newsgroup posting: "i was 15 when i tripped my first time. i got a red gel
tab off some kid it school….anyway, I took it in school, 8th period, and it
really had kicked in when i got home….i was standing atop a desert plateau,
singing to thousands of pissed off monsters….i sat watching the beautiful
hologram-ish images appear before me. i saw Grim Reaper-like images, and
lots of screaming mouths that appeared to be projecting at me. then i went
to dinner with my parents."29
Endnotes
24. "Internet Highway: Road to Enlightenment or Danger?" NDIC, 23 August 2000.
25. Quarterly Trends In The Traffic Report, First Quarter FY 2001, DEA
Houston Field Division.
26. "Users Report the Agony of Ecstasy," NDIC, 16 November 2000.
27. URL: <alt.drugs.ecstasy> newsgroup, actual message posted at URL:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr…ic=1&th=a64dcafe6526c7b2&seekd=902932379>,
accessed on 12 April 2001.
28. URL: <alt.drugs.ghb> newsgroup, actual message posted at URL:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr…ic=1&th=da7e85012da5076&seekd=903352332>,
accessed on 12 April 2001.
29. URL: <alt.drugs.lsd> newsgroup, actual message posted at URL:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr…ic=1&th=bfc5173b54910c57&seekd=939409907>,
accessed on 12 April 2001.
Drug Sales and the Internet
Legal drugs are widely advertised on the Internet and can be ordered
through websites. Controlled substances are openly advertised less often,
but suppliers often arrange sales with customers via bulletin board
discussions carried on in coded language, and then ship drugs to the
customer by mail for an agreed price. Law enforcement reports indicate that
the source of much of these illegal drugs is foreign.30 Wholesalers
sometimes, and perhaps often, act as middlemen between customers and
suppliers in these transactions, and because the customer, supplier, and
wholesaler usually never meet, the threat of exposure and risk is
reduced.31 Minors and young adults searching for user or wholesale
quantities of drugs can easily find suppliers on the Internet. Drug
production equipment, chemicals, and other paraphernalia are readily
obtained through online stores.32
MDMA
MDMA is a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. §
812), and selling the drug over the Internet is prohibited. MDMA sales,
therefore, do not commonly occur via the Internet, but transactions often
are arranged through Internet communications. Negotiations most often are
held on bulletin boards where individuals post messages and wait for
replies. MDMA producers also use these bulletin boards to locate suppliers
of illegal chemicals.33
On February 24, 2000, the New York Police Department arrested a man for
selling MDMA, GHB, ketamine, DXM (dextromethorphan), and more than 16 other
substances over the Internet from Las Vegas. The sources for at least a
portion of his drugs were several Chinese pharmaceutical companies. The man
kept an extensive list of customers from almost every state, many of whom
were minors, and his operations extended to nine countries. The New York
Police Department also arrested a man in the summer of 2000 for selling
MDMA over the Internet from Orlando. The individual was associated with
shipments to 15 states. 34
GHB
GHB was controlled as a Schedule I drug on February 18, 2000. Since that
time, advertisements for GHB sales on the Internet have not been as common.
Websites now are marketing GBL and 1,4-butanediol, GHB analogs that produce
similar effects.35 GBL and 1,4-butanediol sales are probably more common
than those of MDMA or LSD. Sales of GHB still are arranged on the Internet;
customers identify suppliers, place orders, and then receive GHB or GHB
kits36 in the mail for an agreed price.37 Some suppliers sell GHB as a
growth supplement,38 and numerous websites advertising bodybuilding
supplies and health supplements sell items containing GHB.39
Two brothers were recently sentenced to 4 years each for selling GHB "date
rape" kits over the Internet to customers in New Jersey and other states.
The brothers earned about $200,000 from sales that were made between March
1999 and January 2000.40
A 45-year-old man was arrested in Las Vegas in March 1999 for selling GHB
through a website and shipping it cross-country by mail. Law enforcement
seized 200 gallons of chemicals, enough to produce a substantial volume of
GHB worth more than $1 million at the street level.41
LSD
LSD advertisements are also uncommon on the Internet, given that LSD is a
Schedule I controlled substance. However, as with the other "club drugs,"
sales are arranged through communications over the Internet. Information on
the sale of LSD most often is seen on bulletin boards where customers and
suppliers meet. Many LSD bulletin boards use a "frequently asked questions"
(FAQ) structure; a moderator sets ground rules such as "never directly ask
where to purchase LSD or share information regarding individuals who sell
LSD." Website operators use such disclaimers to shield themselves from law
enforcement scrutiny. Hallucinogens that approximate the effects of LSD and
alternate sources for LSD production chemicals are advertised openly on the
Internet.
In February 1999, a Louisiana state narcotics investigator arrested a
22-year-old woman and three of her friends after selling them fake LSD and
MDMA tablets in an undercover operation. The sale, brokered in an Internet
chat room, was extremely easy to arrange, according to the investigator.42
Newsgroup posting: "Does anyone sell ls*d in VA? I want large amounts….This
is a stupid way of finding out but I can't find it anywhere in large
amounts, raves, clubs, dealers, friends, etc. I'm too dumb to be a narc*
PLease help me. I'll travel."43
Endnotes
30. Trends In The Traffic, 1st Quarter 2001, DEA Phoenix Field Division;
Trends In The Traffic, 1st Quarter 2001, DEA St. Louis Field Division.
31. San Diego Police Department interview, conducted by NDIC, 7 March 2001.
32. "Internet Highway: Road to Enlightenment or Danger?" NDIC, 23 August 2000.
33. Trends In The Traffic, 1st Quarter 2001, DEA Detroit Field Division.
34. "Cops Chase Drug Dealers Hawking Wares On Web," New York Daily News, 20
July 2000, URL: <www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n1017/a02.html?190661>; Las
Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, email communication to NDIC, 8 March
2001; "Police Say Web Site Was Sham to Sell Drugs," Metro News Briefs: New
York, URL:
<http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200007/18/eng20000718_45743.html>.
35. Trends In The Traffic, 1st Quarter 2001, DEA Boston Field Division;
Trends In The Traffic, 1st Quarter 2001, DEA St. Louis Field Division.
36. GHB kits generally contain GBL and sodium or potassium hydroxide.
37. "Field Intelligence Collection Plan," Fourth Quarter FY2000, DEA Miami
Field Division.
38. Quarterly Trends In The Traffic Report, First Quarter FY 2001, DEA
Houston Field Division; "Field Intelligence Collection Plan," Fourth
Quarter FY2000, DEA Miami Field Division.
39. Trends In The Traffic, 1st Quarter 2001, DEA New Orleans Field Division.
40. "Two brothers who sold 'date-rape' drug kits over Internet get prison,"
Associated Press, 23 March 2001.
41. Jim Krane, "Narcs Online: Cops Chase Drugs Onto the Net," 22 September
1999, URL: <APBNews.com>.
42. Jim Krane, "Internet Sting Greets Mardi Gras Revelers: Undercover Cop
Nabs Four Accused LSD Buyers," 15 February 1999, URL: <APBNews.com>.
43. URL: <alt.drugs.lsd> newsgroup, actual message posted at URL:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr…ic=1&th=67203b430183zbe9&seekd=986247431>,
accessed on 12 April 2001.
Internet Sampling
NDIC conducted Internet searches to assess the availability of pro-drug
information to the typical Internet user. NDIC used only conventional
online search engines (Google, Northern Light, Yahoo, Alta Vista, and
HotBot) and metasearch engines (Dogpile, Mamma, and C4). The goal was to
find websites that promote or facilitate production, use, and sales of
MDMA, GHB, or LSD. More specifically, NDIC searched for sites containing
the information elements listed in Table 1. [not included here]
NDIC identified 52 sites that contained at least one of these information
elements as they pertain to MDMA, GHB, or LSD, demonstrating that "club
drug" information is readily available to the typical Internet user. The 52
websites were examined further for content, with the following results:
Drug Activity
39 sites contained information on MDMA, GHB, or LSD use. 24 sites contained
information on MDMA, GHB, or LSD production. 6 sites contained information
on MDMA, GHB, or LSD sales.
Associations
35 sites contained links to other drug-related sites. 32 sites probably
were associated with drug legalization groups. 10 sites were personal
websites maintained by individuals. 10 sites probably were associated with
businesses. 8 sites probably were associated with "party scene" or rave groups.
Law Enforcement Evasion
20 sites contained a "for information purposes only" disclaimer. 2 sites
contained information on how to evade law enforcement efforts.
Seven sites targeted young people implicitly or explicitly. In general,
sites maintained by pro-drug legalization groups did not specifically
target young people, but websites dedicated to the party or club scene did
target youth. Additionally, 14 sites provided connections to chat rooms or
other interactivity tools.
Legal Issues: Challenges Facing Policymakers and Law Enforcement
The nature of the threat posed by pro-drug Internet websites raises a
number of legal issues of which policymakers and law enforcement should be
aware. The increasing popularity of the Internet has challenged legislators
and law enforcement officials trying to prevent its use to facilitate drug
crimes. Besides having to develop new investigative methods to adapt to
computer technology, law enforcement agents must ensure that any new
methods are constitutional and comply with federal statutes. Legislators
trying to make certain that federal statutes effectively address the misuse
of the new medium must do so without overreaching and violating individual
rights. The following summarizes some of the legal issues that law
enforcement agents and legislators may encounter. More information can be
found in the 1997 Report on the Availability of Bombmaking Information and
in Searching and Seizing Computers and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in
Criminal Investigations, both published by the Department of Justice.44
First Amendment, U.S. Constitution
Any government effort to restrict individuals from using the Internet to
disseminate information that assists others in illegally producing, using,
or distributing controlled substances must respect the First Amendment of
the Constitution. The First Amendment strongly protects an individual's
right to freedom of speech and can be infringed only in limited situations.
Whether the government can prohibit an individual from disseminating such
information over the Internet depends on factors such as the type of
information disseminated, how it is disseminated, and the intent with which
it is disseminated.
The 1997 Report on the Availability of Bombmaking Information addresses a
number of legal issues involved in limiting the dissemination of bombmaking
information. Although the subject of the report was the dissemination of a
different type of information, its legal analysis can be applied to the
dissemination of information that facilitates drug crimes. The first issue
to be discussed is whether the government can restrict the dissemination of
information simply because it advocates the production, use, or
distribution of controlled substances. This issue has been addressed by
many courts including the U.S. Supreme Court, which clearly have ruled that
any attempt to prohibit the dissemination of such information would violate
First Amendment rights.
A second issue is whether the government can restrict the dissemination of
lawfully obtained information that could be used by others to illegally
manufacture, use, or distribute controlled substances. The answer to this
issue is not as clear. However, courts often have held that if such public
information is widely distributed to a large, unidentified audience, it
cannot be restricted by the government without infringing on First
Amendment rights. The rationale behind this decision is that even
legitimate publications could be used to assist individuals to illegally
manufacture, use, or distribute controlled substances. Legitimate
publications might include textbooks on chemistry or agriculture,
encyclopedias, or even government manuals.
By contrast, if the individual's dissemination of such information is
directed towards a specific person or audience who acts on the information,
the dissemination can rise to the level of "aiding and abetting" another in
committing a crime. Such "aiding and abetting" is considered a "speech act"
and is not constitutionally protected simply because it is speech. Whether
an experienced methamphetamine producer provides an apprentice with
face-to-face assistance or with help over the Internet, the instructions
can still rise to the level of aiding and abetting a criminal act. Such
activity is not protected by the Constitution because, unlike disseminating
information to a wide audience that may or may not engage in the illegal
activity, this dissemination is directed at a person or persons to assist
in committing illegal activity. Even if the recipients of the information
act upon it at some later date, the disseminator can still be prosecuted.
A closely related issue is whether the government can prohibit an
individual from disseminating information with the intent of assisting
another person in the illegal manufacture, use, or distribution of
controlled substances, even when the recipient does not actually act on the
information. The Department of Justice has referred to this issue as
"attempted aiding and abetting." Court decisions seem to allow prohibition
of such dissemination if the government can prove that the individual
disseminated the information with the specific intent of assisting another
individual in committing a drug crime. Individuals prosecuted in cases with
similar issues have argued that they did not know how the recipients were
going to use the information and that they provided the information for
legitimate purposes, such as scientific research, law enforcement purposes,
or general public interest. However, prosecutors have been able to prove
intent in some situations by showing that the disseminated information
contained declarations demonstrating a purpose to facilitate drug crimes,
or that the disseminated information had no use other than to facilitate
drug crimes.
Another closely related issue is whether the government can
constitutionally prosecute individuals who disseminate information with the
knowledge that a specific recipient intends to use it to illegally
manufacture, use, or distribute a controlled substance. Whether such a
restriction is valid under the Constitution is not clear. According to
analysis in the Department of Justice's bombmaking report, such a
prosecution would probably survive a constitutional challenge as long as
the government was required to prove that the individual had reasonable
cause to know that a specific recipient of the information intended to use
the information to commit a crime.
Jurisdiction
The Internet has allowed individuals to conduct real-time criminal activity
without regard to geographic boundaries. Law enforcement officers
investigating such activity must determine the actual location of the
criminal activity and then what legal requirements apply to that jurisdiction.
Criminal activity conducted over the Internet from a foreign country is
just one situation that can cause jurisdictional problems for law
enforcement officers. The Internet allows individuals located in a foreign
country to induce criminal activity in the United States; however, since
the individuals are actually outside the country, they are often
untouchable by the U.S. government. Even if a foreign government assists
U.S. law enforcement officers in the investigation, the investigating
officers must comply with sensitive and complex international policies.
Individuals conducting criminal activity from within the United States can
also cause jurisdictional problems for investigating officers. Individuals
committing crimes over the Internet can be located in various geographical
locations, and the computers storing the data can be in places separate
from the individuals. Prosecution can be difficult because the locations
often cross over different judicial districts, and that can affect various
legal procedures. For example, when investigators apply for a search
warrant to obtain data stored on a computer, they must consider the
judicial districts in which the evidence is actually stored. Although an
agent might be accessing information while he is in New Jersey, the data
could be stored in another judicial district in the United States. This
situation sometimes requires investigators to obtain multiple warrants from
different judicial districts.
Privacy Statutes
Searches of computers by law enforcement officers attempting to gather
evidence of crimes committed over the Internet must comply with federal
statutes that protect individual privacy. Two major statutes are the
Privacy Protection Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000aa, and the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq. If officers
performing searches of computers fail to abide by these statutes, they risk
civil liability for their actions.
The PPA affects law enforcement officers investigating crimes committed
over the Internet because it generally prohibits them from seizing
materials that are possessed for the purpose of publishing information to
the public. A person using a computer to post information on the Internet
may be considered a publisher under the PPA.
An exception under the PPA permits law enforcement officers to seize
materials that are contraband or evidence of a crime. However, this
exception does not give officers carte blanche to seize all the data on the
computer, and officers may have difficulty separating information that is
contraband or evidence of a crime from information not connected with the
investigation. For example, if a computer is used to publish a website that
assists other individuals to commit drug crimes and the same computer is
used to publish a website that addresses politics, the information
connected with the drug crime website would not be protected under the PPA,
but the information connected with the political website could be protected
under the PPA. A mistake by the officers could expose their agency to
liability.
Another statute, the ECPA, is aimed at protecting the privacy of electronic
communications. To comply with the ECPA, law enforcement officers must take
special precautions when searching or seizing computers that contain
electronic communications from third parties. These precautions are
especially important when gathering evidence from an ISP. Like the PPA, the
ECPA imposes civil liability on agencies for any violations of the Act.
Both the PPA and the ECPA are complicated bodies of law. Individuals
wanting more information may wish to read Searching and Seizing Computers
and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in Criminal Investigations.
Execution of Warrants
Because data can be erased easily from computer systems, investigators
executing search warrants must consider the possibility that individuals
may try to destroy evidence before it can be seized. Individuals can set up
their computers so that typing a few keystrokes will initiate the rapid
destruction of incriminating files. Also, data can be stored in various
geographical locations, and any number of persons with access to the
information can destroy it even while investigators are executing a search
warrant. To avoid the loss of important evidence, investigating officers
may want to take extra precautions, such as conducting no-knock searches.
Evidentiary Issues
Proving a criminal case in court that involves computer records creates
certain evidentiary challenges. For instance, in order to use computer
records as evidence in court, the government must establish that they are
"authentic" or are what they appear to be, and authentication of computer
records can be difficult. Computer records can be changed easily, and
defendants sometimes claim that records were altered after they were
created. Computer errors can result in mistakes in the data as well. Also,
the identity of the author of the records can be difficult to establish.
Unlike handwritten material, computer records do not have a distinctive
style, and so other evidence must be used to establish authorship.
Endnotes
44. These reports can be found at
<http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/bombmakinginfo.html> and
<http://www.cybercrime.gov/searchmanual.htm>.
Project Continuation
In phase two of this project, NDIC will produce a full strategic assessment
of the Internet drug threat. NDIC will coordinate with DEA and other
federal law enforcement agencies as appropriate. The assessment will
address in greater detail the intelligence requirements on the production,
use, and sale of illegal drugs by concentrating on the following issues:
1.Identifying the federally scheduled, nonprescription drugs and drug
paraphernalia that constitute the problem.
2.Estimating the number of websites and providing an estimated breakdown by
drug type, by activity type, and possibly by level of activity (high,
medium, low).
3.Identifying the locations of website domains and the locations of routers
for servers hosting websites (specific locations and/or general observations).
4.Assessing the ability of law enforcement to physically locate
individuals/groups.
5.Describing organizational affiliations
(organizations/groups/gangs/independent entrepreneurs, ethnic/demographic
composition, regional/national/international, etc.).
6.Describing the methods of operation individuals/groups use to conduct
business and evade law enforcement (processes, tactics, technical
sophistication, creation/secretion/movement of websites,
deception/countermeasures, security, legal considerations, etc.).
Describing how the Internet's size, traffic, capabilities, audience, etc.,
affect methods of operation. If drug organizations account for part of the
threat, describing their operational infrastructure (key functions, command
and control, inter- and intraorganizational relationships).
-----------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED], a member service of the Multidisciplinary Association
for Psychedelic Studies (see www.maps.org/memsub.html).
To [un]subscribe, email the message text,
[un]subscribe maps-forum youraddress to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List archives: www.cerebral.org/Maps
Guidelines for authors: www.maps.org/guidelines.txt
MAPS Forum is supported by a generous grant from the Promind Foundation.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
<FONT COLOR="#000099">Buy Stock for $4.
No Minimums.
FREE Money 2002.
</FONT><A HREF="http://us.click.yahoo.com/BgmYkB/VovDAA/ySSFAA/aQSolB/TM";><B>Click
Here!</B></A>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
----------------------------------
Smash The State WWW
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smashthestate
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--- End Message ---
