Incident Summary:
10/25/1999: An unknown number of researchers at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota in the United States, received booby-trapped letters containing razor blades, as part of an 80-letter razor-blade campaign, claimed by the animal rights group, The Justice Department. The group targeted scientists, many specifically from Regional Primate Centers across America, who were conducting AIDS and cancer-related research on non-human primates, and the group was against the use of primates for laboratory tests. A communiqué claiming the incident was posted on both The Justice Department's website as well as that of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). Not all of the letters, which also contained diagrams of simple homemade bombs and threats demanding the researchers release the animals and leave the vivisection industry, were confirmed or reported by researchers. The letters were postmarked from Las Vegas, Nevada and allegedly sent out on October 25.
Overview
GTD ID:
199910250007
When:
1999-10-25
Country:
United States
Region:
North America
Province/administrative
region/u.s. state:
Minnesota
City:
Minneapolis
What
Attack Information
Type of Attack () |
Unarmed Assault |
Successful Attack? () |
No |
Target Information ()
Target Type: Educational Institution |
Name of Entity |
at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, MN |
Specific Description |
some researchers at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, MN |
Nationality of Target |
United States |
Additional Information
Hostages |
No |
Ransom |
No |
Property Damage |
No |
How
Weapon Information
Type |
Sub-type |
Other |
|
Weapon Details |
letters in envelopes rigged with utility razor blades affixed to index cards |
Additional Information
Suicide Attack? | No |
Part of Multiple Incident? | Yes |
Criterion 1 () |
Yes |
Criterion 2 () |
Yes |
Criterion 3 () |
Yes |
Doubt Terrorism Proper () |
No |
Additional Information |
This was one in a series of 11 incidents (102599a-k) which constituted an 80-letter razor-blade campaign, claimed by the animal rights group, The Justice Department. The group targeted scientists, many specifically from Regional Primate Centers across America, who were conducting AIDS and cancer-related research on non-human primates, and the group was against the use of primates for laboratory tests. The letters were postmarked from Las Vegas, Nevada with no return addresses and were placed in white envelopes with razor blades inside. Not all of the letters were confirmed. The Justice Department is an animal rights group, much like the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). The group was also active in Canada and England (where it was initially based). The Justice Department also committed a razor blade campaign in August 1999 against the fur industry. Though most sources state that 80 letters were sent out, the group claimed it was over 80 letters, and some sources note as many as 87 letters. |
Who
Perpetrator Group Information
Group Name |
Claimed Responsibility |
The Justice Department |
Yes (Confirmed: Unknown; Mode: Posted to website, blog, etc.) |
Perpetrator Statistics
Number of Perpetrators |
Unknown |
Number of Captured Perpetrators |
Unknown |
Casualty Information
Total Number of Casualties |
0 Fatalities / 0 Injured |
Total Number of Fatalities |
0 |
Number of U.S. Fatalities |
0 |
Number of Perpetrator Fatalities |
0 |
Total Number of Injured |
0 |
Number of U.S. Injured |
0 |
Number of Perpetrators Injured |
0 |
Sources
Sources
Will Woodward, "On Campus, Animal Rights vs. Animal Research; U. of Minnesota Emerges as Focal Point After Raid on Labs, Violent Threats," Washington Post, November 5, 1999. |
Alexis Chiu, "Animal rights extremists suspected of targeting scientists across U.S., Associated Press State & Local Wire, October 28, 1999. |
"Animal Rights Group Mails Razor Blades To Medical Researchers, Says Foundation for Biomedical Research; Group Warns of Wave of Violence If Primate Research Is Not Halted," PR Newswire, October 25, 1999. |
Criteria
Criteria 1
The act must be aimed at attaining a political, economic, religious, or social goal. In terms of economic goals, the exclusive pursuit of profit does not satisfy this criterion. It must involve the pursuit of more profound, systemic economic change.
Criterion 2
There must be evidence of an intention to coerce, intimidate, or convey some other message to a larger audience (or audiences) than the immediate victims. It is the act taken as a totality that is considered, irrespective if every individual involved in carrying out the act was aware of this intention. As long as any of the planners or decision-makers behind the attack intended to coerce, intimidate or publicize, the intentionality criterion is met.
Criterion 3
The action must be outside the context of legitimate warfare activities. That is, the act must be outside the parameters permitted by international humanitarian law (particularly the prohibition against deliberately targeting civilians or non-combatants.
Doubt Terrorism Proper
The existence of a "Yes" for "Doubt Terrorism Proper?" records reservation, in the eyes of GTD analysts, that the incident in question is truly terrorism. Such uncertainty, however, was not deemed to be sufficient to disqualify the incident from inclusion into the GTD. Furthermore, such a determination of doubt is subsequently coded by GTD analysts as conforming to one of four possible alternative designations: 1) Insurgency/Guerilla Action; 2) Internecine Conflict Action; 3) Mass Murder; or 4) Purely Criminal Act.
Alternate Designation
The determination of "yes" for "Doubt Terrorism Proper" by GTD analysts is coded as conforming to one of four possible alternative designations: 1) Insurgency/Guerilla Action; 2) Internecine Conflict Action; 3) Mass Murder; or 4) Purely Criminal Act.
Successful Attack
Success of a terrorist strike is defined according to the tangible effects of the attack. For example, in a typical successful bombing, the bomb detonates and destroys property and/or kills individuals, whereas an unsuccessful bombing is one in which the bomb is discovered and defused or detonates early and kills the perpetrators. Success is not judged in terms of the larger goals of the perpetrators. For example, a bomb that exploded in a building would be counted as a success even if it did not, for example, succeed in bringing the building down or inducing government repression.
Type of Attack
This field captures the general method of attack and often reflects the broad class of tactics used. It consists of the following nine categories:
- Assassination
- Armed Assault
- Unarmed Assault
- Bombing/Explosion
- Hijacking
- Hostage taking (Barricade Incident)
- Hostage taking (Kidnapping)
- Facility / Infrastructure Attack
- Unknown
Target Information
This field captures the general type of target. It consists of the following 22 categories:
- Abortion Related
- Airports & Airlines
- Business
- Government (General)
- Government (Diplomatic)
- Educational Institution
- Food or Water Supply
- Journalists & Media
- Maritime (includes Ports and Maritime facilities)
- Military
- NGO
- Other
- Police
- Private Citizens & Property
- Religious Figures/Institutions
- Telecommunication
- Terrorists
- Tourists
- Transportation (other than aviation)
- Unknown
- Utilities
- Violent Political Parties