Interested in reading more?

VOLUME 7, No:16 The Scientist August 23, 1993 Universities Mobilizing Against Letter Bomb Threat Author:CONNIE O'KANE, p.1 Science departments and individual researchers take protective measures, in case the mailing of deadly missives resumes As faculty, administrators, and students start arriving back on campuses throughout the United States for the new semester, the intense, frightening publicity generated by separate letter bombs that seriously injured two science professors this past June has eased off. However, while the colleges and universities once again become heavily populated, reverberations from the bombings continue to resound throughout the academic research community. Federal investigators apparently are making little progress in identifying the perpetrator. They currently believe the culprit to be a lone serial bomber responsible for the death of one person and injury to 22 others over the past 15 years. Given the assailant's sporadic pattern of violence, law enforcement agents, campus security officials, and individual scientists do not discount the possibility that more such attacks will occur. As a result, individuals, departments, and institutions around the U.S. are taking extra precautions--such as tightening procedures, sponsoring safety seminars, and issuing guidelines for identifying suspicious mail--to guard against any repeats of the tragic events. Yet, with as much concern as the bombings have caused, scientists and academic officials contacted by The Scientist say that panic has not set in; safety procedures, so far, have created no chaos on campus. The reaction of chemistry professor John Bercaw of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena typifies the feelings of many researchers contacted by The Scientist. Bercaw says he was somewhat alarmed at the news of the bombings and instructed his secretary not to open any boxes. (Only one box has come in since then--containing chemical samples and bearing a return address that he recognized.) Despite his initial jitters, however, Bercaw says that he is no longer concerned about the bombings and that, although the events were a topic of conversation among his colleagues, none of them have expressed fear of continuing their work. "I'm afraid scientists are too much in love with what they do to let this keep them out," Bercaw says. The `Unabom' Case The mail bomb incidents, the latest in a series of bombings dubbed the "Unabom" case by the FBI, occurred this summer (see story on page 10). On June 22, Charles J. Epstein, a specialist in the study of genetic disorders at the University of California, San Francisco, was badly injured when he opened a package mailed to his home. Two days later, David Gelernter, a computer scientist at Yale University, was severely wounded when he opened a package that was mailed to his office. Gelernter was still hospitalized late last month at Yale-New Haven Hospital with injuries to his right hand and right eye, according to Cynthia Atwood, a Yale spokeswoman. Epstein lost three fingers, suffered a broken arm, and had abdominal injuries, according to news reports. Although academic scientists and law enforcement authorities have expressed fears that either the bomber will strike again or the incidents will lead to copy-cat attacks, more immediate causes for concern in universities have, thus far, been pranks and scares. In Montgomery County, Md., for example, four residents who work in the field of animal research, whose practitioners have been the target of violent attacks in the past, each found a shoebox-size package wrapped in brown paper left on their front doorsteps on July 6. A bomb-sniffing dog was brought to each location to check the packages, none of which contained a bomb. Once opened, investigators found such things as a brick, a rubber rat, and "fuzzy bear" slippers, says Harry Geehreng, a county police sergeant. In other places, suspicious packages have caused confusion. Four days after the Yale bombing, the Bluemle Life Sciences Building `of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia was evacuated, and police closed a downtown street for two hours before determining that a suspicious package contained only harmless research specimens, according to Carole Gan, a spokeswoman for the school. Yale has had several dozen calls about suspicious bombs since the attack on Gelernter, according to Harry DeBenedet, a bomb technician with the Yale police. The incidents have also led some institutions to adopt preventive measures. Yale has held eight sessions on bomb safety and four others are planned. So far, 400 teachers, administrators, and other university employees have attended. Counseling sessions were also offered by the university, Atwood says. "Judging from the attendance at the [security] sessions, there's a lot of heightened awareness out there," she says. Back To Normal Yet, day-to-day activities at academic laboratories have not been significantly affected, many researchers report. "I think the media tends to worry more about these things than the individuals do," says Herbert Srebnik, former chairman of the biology department and an emeritus professor of anatomy at the University of California, Berkeley. "Some people are more upset by things like this than others. We are busy doing the things we are paid to do and like to do." Srebnik says that he recognizes most of the mail he gets. It's from a person, a pharmaceutical company, or a publishing house-- and normally the individuals sending it are well known to him. "I think most people think they are not going to be a target," Srebnik says. "Speaking for myself, I feel the same way." Harold Kinder, manager of security for Caltech, finds that alarm about a terrorist incident is usually cyclical. "Right after you get publicity, you get a lot of calls and then things taper off," Kinder says. "It [the threat of letter bombs] doesn't seem to be causing any problems at all. There is just a little more concern." Other than some extra training for mail-room staff, it's been business as usual at John Hopkins University in Baltimore, says Dennis O'Shea, director of news and information at the school. "It hasn't been anything that dramatic," he says. "I think it's really bad for morale," says Susan Paris, president of Americans for Medical Progress, a nonprofit group that supports animal research. But, she says, with the amount of tension that has come from environmentalists, animal rights activists, and anti-abortion forces, the bombings shouldn't come as a surprise to scientists. "It can't shock them anymore," she says. University officials say they are coping with the threat of a repeat bombing. "Universities are complicated places," says David Cohen, provost and former vice president for research of Northwestern University. "Stuff goes on all the time." Northwestern, once a target of the "Unabom" bomber, has received other bomb threats and has experienced protests from animal activists, Cohen says, so it is used to dealing with adversity. "I don't sense an extreme level of concern or anxiety," he says. Even at Yale, things have been getting back to normal. "People have really taken it in stride," Atwood says. Safety Advice Despite the calm being reported on campus, as well as the infrequency of the bombing attacks, university administrators and security officers as well as law enforcement officials observe that certain aspects of the bombings provide lessons to all institutions and urge safety precautions and awareness that can reduce the danger. Although bombing experts are reluctant to talk in absolutes, there is agreement that a simple envelope is not a threat. If the recipient can lay the envelope flat and feel only paper inside, there should be nothing to fear. "When you say `letter bomb,' sometimes that's misleading," De-Benedet says. "It has to have weight to it." That weight comes from a detonating device and the explosives, items that are necessary if a letter bomb is going to cause injury to the person opening it. But knowing that a portion of a scientist's mail can be eliminated as a threat shouldn't provide too much relief for a worried scientist. The National Association for Biomedical Research--in an alert sent to its members, most of whom use animals in their work--warns that a piece of mail large enough to contain a book of matches is sufficient cause for concern. According to guidelines issued by the U.S. Postal Service, recipients should be on the alert if packages have the wrong name or title; have no return address; have markings that say "personal" or "fragile"; have misspelled words or bad typing; have a postmark that differs from the return address; are bulky or lopsided; have strange odors, oil stains, or protruding wires; or make a ticking sound. Unfortunately, outside of the more obvious signs--a ticking sound, for example--these warnings probably cover a good deal of innocent mail that investigators receive. It is, for example, highly impractical for a university professor to call campus police every time he or she receives a parcel without a return address. "That would be a victory for the bombers themselves," De-Benedet says, "because their terroristic act has had all the reaction." Moreover, as time passes after a frightening incident, people are likely to let down their guard, officials say. Thus, it's better for a scientist to embark on a long-term program of prudence, they say. The first step of this program would entail paying attention to unexpected mail. "They usually know the type of mail they are receiving and who they are receiving it from," DeBenedet says. With unexpected mail, the scientist can alleviate his or her concerns with a phone call to the sender identified by the return address. De-Benedet estimates that, 98 percent of the time, a call is enough to verify that a package is safe. The problem of unexpected mail, however, is somewhat complicated by the actions of someone like the "Unabom" bomber, who has come up with plausible return addresses and in several cases has sent a fabricated letter to set up the arrival of the parcel bomb. In the two recent bombings, for example, the packages bore the return addresses of two different scientists at California State University in Sacramento. Earlier, the bomber had sent a letter to an airline executive telling him a book would be sent. Another note, to University of Michigan psychology professor James McConnell, asked him to read a manuscript. In both cases, the targets were injured in subsequent bombings. There is, however, some logic to the intentions of a bomber. Generally bombers want to hit a specific individual, and they don't want to get caught. Targeting a particular person, they are liable to include a notation on the package saying "personal and confidential" or "private." Because they want to avoid detection, the addresses bombers put down are likely to be flawed. Their handwriting might be distorted in order to be disguised, for example. Or, not wanting to risk a phone call to verify information, the bomber might make a mistake with a title or a department. The address might be in cut-and-paste lettering or be written on a homemade label. In addition, because bombs require such unusual elements, there can be telltale signs on the package. One such clue is a wire sticking out of the packaging. With the rough handling that mail sometimes gets, it is possible that a wire could poke through. Aluminum foil is another indication of a suspicious package, since foil is a common electrical switching device. Explosives can leave distinctive signals, as well. Some explosives leak, so an oil stain could be an indication of a bomb. Black powder has a rotten-egg smell, and other explosive materials have peculiar odors. Odor and stains are the more obvious warnings. Sometimes, other clues can be found in the packaging. Since bombs require several elements--detonating devices, explosives, and so forth--wrapping is often irregular. The package might appear sloppily wrapped with several combinations of tape. It might have soft spots or bulges. There also might be a sloshing sound--an indication that gasoline or another flammable liquid is present.` Bombers want to make sure their packages don't get sent back, so they often put extra postage and notations like "Fragile--Handle With Care" and "Rush--Do Not Delay." Since mail bombs are designed to be triggered when opened, pressure or resistance when attempting to remove contents can be another sign of trouble. One advantage the recipient of a suspicious parcel has is time, De-Benedet says. As package bombs are designed to be tossed and dropped without exploding, there's a chance the parcel might have already had some rough treatment in the mail before it arrived at a suspicious recipient's desk. If a package has aroused suspicions and the recipient cannot allay his or her fears, it's time to call the police. Postal officials recommend that the recipient isolate the parcel and evacuate the immediate area. A suspicious package should not be put in a desk drawer or dropped in water. If possible, though, a window should be opened to allow venting of gases. Err On The Side Of Caution Postal authorities and university law enforcement officials caution that individual scientists must be responsible for inspecting and opening the mail. The post office--and even university mail rooms--simply handle too much traffic to inspect for bombs. (Technically, there are some precautions that post offices could take. Equipment that measures the dielectric constant of a package would probably discover a bomb because explosives would have a detectable reading, according to Anthony Fainberg, an analyst of counter-terrorism. This equipment could be set up in the same area as the scanners that read zip codes. Though this would be enormously expensive, it would be practical for some post offices in university towns if the threat were great enough, Fainberg says.) But these same officials stress that someone who finds a suspicious package should not be too embarrassed to call the police. "Personally, I'd rather look silly than be in a hospital," says Richard Koehn, vice president for research at the University of Utah. "I'd hope the staff and faculty would feel the same."` Calls to check suspicious packages have not taxed their personnel excessively, security officials at several universities say. At Yale, De-Benedet says that anyone who is suspicious should call every time he or she suspects something wrong. If police inspect an innocent package, DeBenedet tells the person who requests the search to call again if necessary. "If they receive another package the next day and they feel suspicious, they should call us back," he says. A staff member at the National Academy of Sciences, who asks to remain anonymous, sums up the feelings expressed by several scientists: "If a terrorist sends me a post card, I'm not going to worry about it. If he sends me a two-pound package, I'd be worried. I come from the standpoint that more paranoia is better than less paranoia." Connie O'Kane is a freelance writer based in Philadelphia.

Universities Mobilizing Against Letter Bomb Threat

Aug 22, 1993

Universities Mobilizing Against Letter Bomb Threat

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of