Skip to content or view screen version

Novartis CEO's hunting lodge destroyed

07.08.2009 10:27 | SHAC | Animal Liberation | World

"Dealing with HLS means dealing with US." - MFAH Austria

In an act of direct action against top Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) customer Novartis, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Daniel Vasella had his hunting lodge in the town of Bach, in Tyrol, Austria, destroyed by fire (see photos). The Militant Forces Against HLS (MFAH) claimed responsibility for the arson in an anonymous communique, calling on Vasella to sever all ties with HLS. The activists reported that Vasella butchers animals at HLS, Europe's largest and most exposed vivisection laboratory, through contracts made with Novartis, as well as butchering animals in his own private hunting estate. A spokesperson for Novartis said he has now decided to sell the property that was burnt with 60 litres of petrol.

The MFAH formed in April this year and have targeted HLS customers in France, Germany, Belgium and now Austria. They are relatively unknown and adhere to no guidelines, although are affiliated with the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). In recent months the militant group have reportedly targeted Novartis in France, burning down a sports centre and in Germany, vandalising the Vice Chairman's cars and home, returning a month later to place incendiary devices under his two cars. They have also targeted HLS customers Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Schering Plough and Pfizer.

Related articles: Warning painted at Novartis subsidiary | Glaxo billboards cut down, painted over | After-hours visit to HLS supplier | Home visit for Pfizer executive | "Break with HLS" painted at Novartis | Cars destroyed at home of Novartis executive | Payback time for the animals inside HLS | Suprise for Schering Plough Director | Smear campaign against Novartis vivisectors | Arson attack on Novartis clubhouse | HLS customers targeted | ALF knock-and-run | Attacks against NYSE Euronext | Home visits for Novartis scum, and deer running free | Novartis worker visited at home | Bayer and Novartis criminals tracked down and attacked | More articles

On July 27th in Chur, Switzerland, media reported that the ashes of Vasella's mother were stolen and her gravestone defaced with "Drop HLS Now". Additionally, about three weeks ago, graffiti slogans against Vasella and Novartis were written on the church in Vasella's village of Risch in central Switzerland. Messages were also left on the road near his home including "Vasella is a killer. We are watching you. Death to Vasella. We'll be back."

Furthermore, the Animal Liberation Brigade in June claimed setting fire to the Novartis directors cars in Switzerland. ALF activists also said they vandalised the property of four Novartis executives in May, painted the house of another worker in April and painted slogans against company offices in Mexico and the UK.

According to Novartis, attacks on houses and cars of the company employees as well as on Novartis property have grown in recent months, no doubt due to the MFAH, ALF and attacks by other individuals. This is despite the crackdown against Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) by imprisoning seven UK SHAC activsits, with the campaign group denying any involvement in the Novartis attacks.

Anonymous communique:

Daniel Vasella's Hunting House
Oberbach, A-6653 Bach, Austria
night 02-03 August 2009

As well as butchering animals at HLS, Novartis Chairman and CEO Daniel Vasella likes to butcher animals in his own private hunting estate in Austria. He had it personally built in a town called Bach, up in the mountains. There is a large cooling unit and an area for preparing his kills, which he sometimes supplies to the local restaurant. There is also a large garage, that we guess holds the car that picks him up from the neighboring town (the rich scumbag flies in on his personal helicopter!)

You could tell it was his house from a distance - the skulls of deer we saw hanging from the walls outside and inside only made us more determined.

60 litres of petrol was concentrated in two places around the house - the roof sheltering the front entrance was packed full of petrol bombs with most of the petrol containers placed under it by the door to catch the wood inside, and around the side the wooden garage door and angled roof supports were targetted with the second group of devices.

It hasn't been your week has it, Daniel? Understand this: This will continue until you sever all ties with Huntingdon Life Sciences. We will attack your private life wherever possible. If you think it's fun killing animals in your own forest in Austria and bring them to your hunting estate, we will destroy it. Have you got any more hobbies Daniel? We will destroy them. We will destroy your life. Just remember one thing, dealing with HLS means dealing with US.


MFAH Austria - if it can burn, it WILL..."

About Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS):

Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) are in the business of poisoning healthy animals to death. They are a contract testing operation that tests products for others. They have three sites two in the UK and one in the US. Five hundred animals are put to death every day by HLS, killing tens of thousands of horses, cats, dogs, primates, rabbits, hamsters, rats, mice and fish amongst others each year.

Shareholders, stockbrokers, market makers, suppliers and clients have all dumped HLS, including the world’s largest companies; all four main high street banks in the UK, the world’s largest financial institution, the world’s second largest bank and the world’s largest insurance broker. Huntingdon are $72 million dollars in debt with NO commercial bank and insurance company anywhere in the world prepared to deal with them.

HLS’ key weakness is their finances and by throwing the spotlight on those funding their abuse campaigners across the globe have managed to bring HLS to the brink of financial collapse. Throughout the campaign activists have made financial history as one by one major corporations have yielded to protester power and severed their links with the failing company.

Campaigners use evidence obtained in seven undercover investigations at their different laboratories in the UK and USA where HLS workers have been caught on film punching puppies in the face, simulating sex with animals in their care, cutting open primates while they are still alive and falsifying experiments to get products on the market. HLS workers have even been caught drunk at work and dealing drugs at the labs.

Huntingdon Life Sciences have a criminal record from a British court of law for breaking the Companies’ Act. They are the only UK laboratory to ever have their licence revoked by the government.

Previous features: Highgate Farm Protest Camp | Operation Liberation: Highgate Rabbit Farm | Largest Shareholder Barclays and Top Investors Dump HLS | World Day for Animals in Laboratories March | SHAC supporter unlawfully arrested at Barclays Bank | SHAC Shakedown City Investors | Top HLS Investors Dump Shares | HLS Exposed - Yet Again! SHAC To Shakedown Financial Investors In The City | 50 Years For The UK SHAC 7 | Anti-vivisection campaigners convicted of blackmail | Largest HLS Investor Dumps All Shares | SHAC Prepares For National March & Rally | Victory for animal rights campaigners | Activist Imprisoned for Shouting | Fisher Scientific Embarrassed Over Links with HLS | SHAC World Day for Lab Animals | Asahi Glass Protesters Harassed by Police | "March Against the Murderers"


Hide the following 9 comments

sorry but what a load of rubbish ..

16.08.2009 19:29

.. so someone can use a lighter or strike a match? grow up .. if you want to change the world you work with people, change your community, don't be a toy town terrorist ..



16.08.2009 21:06

ANC, Black Panthers, Suffragettes, etc. They all made change by using fire.

It's always interesting hearing ageism to confront revolutionary direct action.

look at history

terrorism never changed society for the better

17.08.2009 07:25

.. and the ANC and suffragettes and Panthers when they succeeded it was due to mass actions based on mass movement NOT on small direct actions. you are simply wrong on your history.


You're wrong about history

17.08.2009 14:28

...mass movements and mass direct action go hand in hand. The compliment each other.

See for an example.



17.08.2009 19:38

The Suffragettes used to go to Knightsbridge with hammers and smash in every window, they burnt Oxford University boathouse to the ground, they set fire to fabric nd stuffedit into letter boxes, they even burnt the Home Secretary's house to the ground. I salute those brave men and women and thank them fromthe bottom of my heart for the freedoms they risked theirs lives and liberty for. Suffragettes were ridiculed for their conviction that women are equal, who today will condemn them? Who today will denounce them as terrorists? If they had asked politely for the right to vote we would all still be wearing corsets and face destitution without male support.
This was a hunting lodge and within its walls innocent deer and wild boar corpses were carved up, it was a place used as a HQ for murdering the innocent. Furthermore not one person was harmed in this action which took courage, intelligence and selfless compassion for the innocent. I have not the guts or the capacity to do such an action myself but fully support those who have the courage to try and prevent extreme violence with property damage.

Lynn Sawyer


18.08.2009 20:16

I can't actually believe what I am reading.
Lynn - so it terrorism is justified if they've got the right cause eh?
What if the BNP decided it wanted to burn down some houses? Maybe HLS will go on an arson spree of ALF supporter's vegan cafes. The point is any movement is capable of violent direct action. Should be let them all just get on with it? Or only tolerate the ones whose cause you think is correct?
There are extremists in every movement, and it's up to the sensible masses to ensure social change happens without violence.



19.08.2009 06:13

Part of me would be happy if a vivisector were to burn my car. Then at least I might be convinced that they genuinely believed in what they were doing. It would show they had passion and feel that strongly that what they do is right, and that they were motivated by something other than profit.

You can't do something as controversial as engage in a mass genocide of animals without expecting some kind of action against you, in the same way that you can't take actions such as this arson without expecting to be treated like shit, and lose a considerable amount of your liberty if caught.

And the BNP do conduct arsons etc... against their targets. The difference being they don't care if people get hurt.



19.08.2009 20:55

>> Part of me would be happy if a vivisector were to burn my car. Then at least I might be convinced that they genuinely believed in what they were doing. It would show they had passion and feel that strongly that what they do is right, and that they were motivated by something other than profit.

Jeez, you really are fucked up arnt you?



19.08.2009 22:38

"I can't actually believe what I am reading.
Lynn - so it terrorism is justified if they've got the right cause eh?"

Firstly, a quick definition of terrorism: exerting terror against individuals who can feel terror.

Secondly, you can debate the definition of terrorism (extering terror) for centuries, but it's about as illogical and (oxy)moronic as redefining any "ism". Thirdly, don't confuse terrorists with political terrorists. Politcal terrorists are obviously those who exert terror for political reasons, terrorists are for example playful kids, e.g. scaring someone by saying boo.

So, unless you oppose Nelson Mandela and Malcom X for example, two of most legendary terrorists of all time, then the answer is obviously yes (terrorism is justified if they've got the right cause). Their terrorism was against white supremacists, not the innocent public. Same as the suffragettes and animal liberationists today; they target guilty oppressors.

It's interesting to note that self-defence, an extentional version of it, or the threat of it, nearly always includes exerting terror, whether intentionally or not. For example a woman who is about to defend herself from a rapist may unintentionally exert terror by the mere threat of defending herself. A rapist could feel threatened by this, minorly terrified, and thus the woman would be a terrorist. Most would agree her terrorism would be justified.

"What if the BNP decided it wanted to burn down some houses?"

I'm guessing you mean members of the BNP, as an organisation can't burn down some houses, neither can a corporation, only representatives of such entities can.

In response, BNP activists do burn down houses (notably mosques, as part of their islamophobic campaign), so your question isn't really actually a question.

"Maybe HLS will go on an arson spree of ALF supporter's vegan cafes."

Again you mean HLS workers or representatives, as a corporation (as an entity) can't burn down buildings. As Aruthur hinted above, if this happened then it would show that these scumbags are not just motivated by money (unless they were paid of course to do so), therefore showing they have passion, dedication and strong feelings on animal issues.

This is obviously highly unlikely, unless the abusers were responsible for their own business and needed the money badly, such as the Newchurch's Hall family who physically attacked activists and attacked cars. The attacks were however clearly motivated by money, rather than any other passionate incentive such as compassion.

"The point is any movement is capable of violent direct action. Should be let them all just get on with it?"

This is the opening debate for the question of pacifism. Should we allow rape victims to attack the individuals who rape them, molested children to attack the paedophiles that abuse them, woman to attack the men that beat them? Of course people should be allowed to fight back in the way they see appropriate, as part of a diversity of tactics.

"...Or only tolerate the ones whose cause you think is correct?"

This is a double-sided question for anyone paying attention. If you are going to not tolerate violence, therefore stand against it, you then must use violence for this to be effective. By not tolerating causes and opposing them (properly) you create your own violent cause.

"There are extremists in every movement, and it's up to the sensible masses to ensure social change happens without violence."

Of course, because a pacfist revolution won't get crushed by violence - hilarious!

Hey Hitler, please listen, don't do that, people don't like it and we want you to stop.

What next, Barack Obama is going to bring about anarchism?