21st AZK – Klaus Scheidsteger „30 Years of Lobbying Against Critical Wireless Radiation Research“

06.09.2025 | www.kla.tv/38776

General information on legal regulations and the AZK rules can be found at the end of the presentation [Ivo Sasek:] And now, let's move on to capital crimes that are protected by law. And we will be talking about the wireless communications lobby once again. And again, a first-class speaker from Germany will be directing our attention on that deadly technology that has been pushed through relentlessly, bypassing any consumer protection. And being directly affected by this tragedy myself, with hundreds of sleepless nights resulting from this deadly technology, I personally was relieved of my ignorance during the first AZK, showing me the way out of my torments. And I say: please carry the knowledge of our next speaker to the ends of the earth, because sooner or later, I am convinced, it will affect everybody down here severely, on many different levels. And as we always say, only together can we end the highly criminal and pernicious influence the mobile phone lobby exerts on politics, legislation and the media. And which wonderful man this is who will now be speaking to us and will shed light on these unbelievable dealings and extent of this crime you can see from his bio. [Biography:] -Klaus Scheidsteger, born in 1954, was part of the first class journalism students at the University of Dortmund. -After completing an integrated traineeship at WDR, West German Broadcasting in Cologne, he moved to France for four years as a freelance writer and produced his first documentary film in 1982. Clockwork Orange, in the cogwheels of violence, a portrait of the English writer Anthony Burgess. -In the mid-1980s, he founded a TV station in his hometown of Essen and used his own camera and studio equipment to produce news, reports and documentaries for the public broadcasters ARD and ZDF as well as RTL and SAT.1. Later the cultural channel ARTE was added to the list. He supplied this channel with ready-to-broadcast portraits in co-production with the biggest German television stations ARD, NDR, BR, MDR and ZDF. - In 2006, his first in-depth report on mobile communications was broadcast as a commission production by the French TV station FR2 "Mobile phones on trial". -The German co-production partners MDR, which is a member of ARD, shortened the report without consultation and broadcast it under the title "The Mobile Phone War" without announcing it in the morning program. The 50-minute film provides insight into the legal battle waged by brain tumor patients against the entire mobile communications industry in the USA. - Ten years later, Scheidsteger's first cinema documentary was released under the title "Thank you for calling – mobile phones can endanger your health", -followed in 2018 by a book on the same subject -His latest film "The Digital Dilemma", was released in May 2024. This film caused a sensation at a preview screening at the EU Parliament in Brussels and is now available online in four languages and in selected cinemas. -Klaus Scheidsteger is the initiator of a mobile phone study that is causing a stirr in international scientific circles as the basis for various international lawsuits. Today he talks about: “30 Years of Lobbying Against Critical Mobile Phone Research” [Ivo Sasek:] It is an honor to have you with us. And we're going to open our ears wide now, we're excited to hear what's coming. Thank you for being here. [Klaus Scheidsteger:] Thank you, thank you. Yes, very impressive. Thank you very much for the invitation. What the Sasek family is achieving here, is unique, not so easy to try replicating that! It is indeed something very special that you have here. I've been involved in this topic for pretty much exactly 20 years. And since I'm a trained television journalist, a reporter, I thought I'd also bring along some elements from various films. First of all, perhaps a quick introduction. What actually is lobbying? In my research I understood that there is a very large hotel opposite the White House in Washington, about 400 meters beeline. Journalists, politicians, lawyers and influential people have been meeting there since the 1950s. And the lobby opens directly into the hotel bar. And there of course, over two or three gin-tonics – sometimes four – talks would be about taking influence and also possibilities to manipulate oriented to favor of the industry and thus against the consumers. This became very obvious to me when I was getting into the topic of wireless communications research. For starters I will take you on a little excursion into the past. Simply so that I can sharpen your senses. We remember that there was a real evolution. In the beginning, these gadgets were incredibly expensive. And only very privileged people were able to afford them. Today's 20-year-olds will hardly remember. Maybe they'll find some old models from their dads still. But what later became this all-rounder model, the smartphone, which brings all these incredible possibilities, actually took over 30 years to develop. And during this time, there was also cause for lobbying to interfere with this developing new industry. So here is this gentleman whom I want to present, Larry King had access to about 100 countries with his show in the early 90s. His show was shown there and sold. And of course accordingly he had an impressive influence, which can be compared to Ivo Sasek. He was really traveling around the world and always had interesting guests. And one day, in late 1992 / early 1993, a man from Florida came on his show and said my wife died from a brain tumor. And I trace it back to the frequent use of her cell phone. The tumor developed where she always held the phone. And I'm now suing Motorola. Motorola was the market leader at the time. And after the Larry King Show, Motorola had a dangerous slump on the stock market. They lost 10% of their share value within a week. That was in 1992/93. And as a filmmaker I have the great privilege to always seek out people who have made history and who subsequently have something to tell us. And that's why I always like to let the experts speak themselves. That way I also cannot be attacked. Although, it happens anyway – I'll get to that later. I'm going to start with a person from Vienna. And later on in the little video clip a scientist from Washington State University will take over. Just to give you a little feeling and take you on a little journey to this time of the beginning of wireless communications. Please play the video clip. [Video clip:] In the beginning, mobile technology was an elite technology. That means a very small group of the population used this technology and almost overnight, it became a mass technology. And this phenomenon not only surprised me, but also the economy. A vanishingly small number of potential customers had been expected, and now it's the whole world. Surprisingly, although microwave radiation is used for the transmission technology, the US authorities did not feel obliged to demand a technology risk assessment from the manufacturer. Mobile phone pioneer Motorola was able to put the cell phones on the market bypassing the regulatory authorities. When the first scientific studies on possible health risks were due for publication in the mid-1990s, things got uncomfortable. A team led by Professor Henry Lai of Washington University had found so-called DNA strand breaks [= damage to the DNA] in animal experiments. The precursor to cancer was clearly visible under the electron microscope. One conclusion is that radio frequency fields can damage DNA. Of course, when you damage DNA, the cell tries to repair and in that process it make mistake and it causes genetic mutation. And of course genetic mutation can possibly lead to development of cancer. The scientific findings, which were threatening from the point of view of the first cell phone manufacturer Motorola, were prepared in an industry-friendly manner by the master manipulators, the lobby agency Burson-Marsteller. They presented their client Motorola a so-called wargame memo [wargame: organized scientific fraud with the aim of defaming inconvenient studies]. A strategy paper with directives on how to downplay the study and discredit the scientists. [Klaus Scheidsteger: ] Exactly, so that's a small excerpt from this so-called wargame plan. They go as far as to say that the people who find out something should get into trouble for that. You have to question what even is being researched there. It's still a new field and we simply have to carry out the research ourselves. And then they bought this man, Dr. George Carlo. It was very interesting for me because he had written a book. He had been chosen by the industry in 1993, with a budget of 25 to 30 million US dollars, to find out over a time of five to six years that there was no problem. He was actually considered industry-friendly. He was an up-and-coming young scientist at the time – born in 1953, i.e. 40 years old at the time. He had already done some research, for the military for example, and also had legal expertise. He had studied medicine and law, so he was a very ambitious young man at the time. But they bet the wrong horse. By the way, the first thing he found out with the institute he founded WTR, short for Wireless Technology Research, is that people with pacemakers get problems when they carry a cell phone on them. This was already the case in the mid-90s. And what did the industry do? They took note of this and then asked the manufacturers of pacemakers to change their frequency. As you can see, these proceedings have always been quite weird. And then, because of these findings, which then became public, he himself got a problem, the first problem. They said, okay, and this was the industry association in Washington, CTIA, who had commissioned him and actually made these studies possible with government money. They said, that's not how this works, boy, no more money. He had to fight really hard and thank God, he was able to get back on track. And he still got the money until 1999. And at the end of his career, he was considered unsustainable. And I had the pleasure of getting to know this man. And his story was, so to speak, exemplary for what was happening behind the scenes in terms of lobbying measures. And these are measures that are still valid today. So he experienced a lot of discrediting. Then, buying science from own industry-friendly ranks. This didn't work with him, but it did work on others. Thirdly, self-portrayal as having responsible industry orientation for the benefit of the customer and innovative technology. And lastly: filling relevant positions with their own people or people close to the industry. With George Carlo they had chosen the wrong one. And that's why I also include the WHO in my presentation. Because of course the WHO cannot ignore this new phenomenon of mobile communications and the possible consequences in the healthcare system. And that's why they launched the so-called international EMF project. The director was Dr. Michael Repacholi from Australia. He was then transferred to Geneva. I visited him at the time because he had caught my eye. I show that in a little clip. Please roll the next video. [Video clip: ] The Australian Dr. Michael Repacholi was regarded as the crown witness of the cell phone critics because he had seen an increased develpment of cancer in mice exposed to cell phone radiation in his study published in 1995. Now the man sat at the WHO and questioned his own study. He was practically wargaming himself. Now my study was looking at transgenic mice that were predisposed to get lymphoma. And we found an increasing lymphoma from the radio frequency signals. And we spent six months going through that study to find out what we did wrong because heaven we don't know why there should be an increasing lymphoma. And we still don't know… He finds a problem, and still can't figure out where the problem comes from, and therefore there is no problem. The associated language use was standardized and prescribed worldwide. We have not found any evidence to suggest that these phones are not safe. Under the WHO flag, the Australian sailed around the world from 1997 to 2006, spreading the good news: "No problem". Dr. Michael Repacholi felt very secure. After all, he was the official mobile voice of the WHO. But he made mistakes. The dear money. The funding that comes from industry has to go into a separate pot and then it's provided to WHO. And so it happened that the good man was finally exposed as an industry paid advocate and trivializer. He then retired from the WHO and has since been working behind the scenes as an industry consultant. During his time as project manager in Geneva he made a good job. The growing industry of mobile communications was conquering the world at a rapid pace. While it took twelve years to reach the first billion cell phone connections worldwide, it took only three years for the second, two years for the third billion and so on. Today there are more cell phone contracts than inhabitants in the western world – "Mission accomplished". [Klaus Scheidsteger:] So that was a little excursion into the WHO. By the way, that man was very interested to get George Carlo's position. But in the meantime, as I said, he has been exposed, thank God. But once an opinion has been manifested that there is no problem, an opinion that was convenient to industry-oriented and industry-friendly countries of course, it is very hard to get rid of it. People keep asking me, but there's nothing there. Yes, the media keep reporting something different. So that's the next stage, so to speak, that science is being misrepresented and results are being manipulated. And let's look at a part of German-Austrian history at this point. Because there was a European-funded study, the so-called Reflex study. And the same pattern can be seen here, again. Inconvenient scientists and researchers must be fought. Or wargamed. I have prepared another small excerpt for you here. Professor Franz Adlkofer is unfortunately no longer with us. But he was a great man of research, who actually when I met him for the first time, he told me that everyone around had been saying, “But there is nothing to be found!” And then he said, okay, let's demonstrate it. Then we'll find out if there is nothing related to health problems. [Video clip:] Professor Franz Adlkofer was to become the next prominent wargame victim. With a total of twelve research groups from seven countries, he coordinated a so-called reflex study funded by the EU. A team led by Professor Hugo Rüdiger had again failed to deliver results from the laboratories of the Vienna Medical University that were agreeable to the industry. We have shown, on the basis of the REFLEX data that high-frequency electromagnetic fields can damage genes. We can no longer be sure that damage will not occur that endangers the health of cell phone users. We cannot exclude the possibility that in 15-20 years the incidence of brain tumors will increase significantly. Let's take the evidence in electromagnetic fields seriously now and not wait another 40 years until we might see something. The accident insurance company AUVA from Vienna looked anxiously at the Reflex study results and wanted to commission the replication at the MedUni Vienna as well so to speak. Now the wargame strategy was urgently needed. In 2008, the renowned German news magazine DER SPIEGEL accused the now retired Professor Rüdiger of falsification. The picture and the headline suggested the professor was having an affair with a female laboratory assistant. The alleged falsification affair was uncovered by a biologist from faraway Bremen, who is considered industry-friendly. According to DER SPIEGEL, the study results, including DNA strand breaks, were only faked work of a lab assistant who adored her professor. From one day to the next, the scientists and their work were discredited. [Klaus Scheidsteger:] Yes, with these means the wargaming works very well. I'll speak some more about Vienna, as we also have Austrian guests here. In the next slide, I have included a small headline from an article in the political magazine "Profil". That's the little "SPIEGEL" as I like to call it. And the science journalist Tina Goebel, had actually researched the reflex scandal properly and came to completely different conclusions. She found out that the scientists hadn't faked anything here, but that external pressure had been exerted on the lab technician, for example, and so on and so forth. So this was a dirty campaign launched by a lobbyist from Bremen, who is well known. I will talk about him later in a different context. I found this radiation smear campaign, uncovered by my journalist colleague, very interesting. And it had of course other dimensions in consequence. And I asked her about that. The next clip please. [Video clip:] A side effect of strategic wargaming that should not be underestimated is that of intimidation. Who would want to mess with an overpowering, well-funded industry just because a health risk might be found? I also know of researchers who have actually been involved in this, who have said: “I never want to do any more research on cell phone radiation, because if I find out that it is harmful to health, then the lobby will destroy me.” So there really are concerns on the part of scientists who simply don't want to touch this research anymore. This has become a hot potato, because they are afraid that they will be destroyed not only scientifically, but also personally, as was experienced in Vienna. In fact, a pattern has been clear since the 1994 wargame memo. All scientists who found a problem with microwave radiation from our cell phones and smartphones subsequently got a problem themselves. The strategies of wargaming are still present today. In Vienna too a bad taste remains, although the initiator of the alleged forgery has been convicted in the meantime and the scientific work of the Viennese researchers have been confirmed internationally. The Vienna research scandal was a reaction of what I call a lobbyist from Germany, who made accusations. First an academic and then actually a very profound dispute was launched in order to simply discredit certain research results and to make them disappear. Seven years later, I can say with a clear conscience that the man was convicted, because his accusations were false defamation, there is no truth in his allegations. To all those who still have in the back of their minds that something went wrong, we can say today: "Everything is in perfect order!" We are continuing to follow up this data. We have just completed the follow-up project, which means that we have been able to confirm and deepen the findings from the first major project. It is not only the case that DNA breaks in some cells that react sensitively, we now also know why it breaks. We can describe the cellular mechanism behind this. Which is an important finding from a scientific point of view in order to present the facts in a plausible way. Wargaming in Austria means then probably also malicious interpretation and distortion of facts, as here with the AUVA study led by Professor Mosgöller by the industry lobby association FMK from Vienna. The scheme of deliberate misinterpretation is often taken to extremes when, for example, fake news is published in the Austrian medical journal, which only on closer examination turns out to be paid advertising. But things are getting tight for the master manipulators. [Klaus Scheidsteger:] Yes! So these are things that you only discover at second glance, and the normal consumer doesn't even notice that this all may just be bought advertisement. But these are the means being used. This is radiation dirt. And now there was another complicating factor, namely that the WHO's cancer agency, the IARC, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is based in Lyon, issued a carcinogen category classification of 2b in 2011. And this category was also made public, and incidentally the man who had triggered the Vienna scandal was not admitted to the expert panel because of his proximity to industry. And he even publicly got angry about it. And the industry of course tries to play down this classification, but then further studies came along that confirmed the suspected cancer risk. At the same time there were two studies, two large research studies, one in the USA and one in Bologna, Italy. And the next film clip, which I have chosen for you to make the whole thing a little more tangible, explains the study and how it is being combated again. [Video clip:] Again it was the journal Microwave News that first wrote about the NTP study [= National Toxicology Program – long-term study on rats and mice] and reminded that DNA strand breaks had already been found more than 20 years ago. One of the NTP study coordinators warns urgently and demands immediate measures. Because of the widespread use of cell phones, even a small increase in risk would have a serious public health impact. And in the meantime, rather than telling people if you are concerned this is what you can do, the health agencies need to promote precautionary measures, especially for children and women. Because in children, the risks could be greater due to the increased penetration as well as the sensitivity of the developing brain to tissue damaging agents. So finally, what is the lesson learned? We should no longer assume that any current or future wireless technology, including 5G, is safe without adequate testing. Because the not-do-so is not ethical. At about the same time as the NTP study, a long-term study on rats and mice was conducted in Bologna, Italy. The study also started in 2005 and showed serious indications of developments of rare tumors by mobile radio radiation. As expected, both studies are now facing massive attacks. The lobby association ICNIRP [= international association of scientists, allegedly for research into the effects of non-ionizing radiation on human health] again tries to downplay the results, claiming that they were even coordinated. The head of the Italian study sees wargaming in this way: The only thing that they have in common that the studies are independent. This is very important. We had the same result. I say not by chance. And again they accuse us to give results that could affect the stability of society. We are so happy to have all these devices. And now we are making fear among the people? No, I don't want to make fear. I want to push industry to be at the service of society. Because usually we consumers are at the service of society. So I would like to change this paradigm. And I have not the responsibility of the change. If it turns out that the animal tests also show such clear indications, as it seems to be the case according to the first reports, then there is no other option than classification in group 1. Otherwise, this would contradict the criteria of the IHC [= an economic club]. So, under these conditions, an assessment into group 1, i.e. "carcinogenic to humans", would be inevitable. [Klaus Scheidsteger:] Yes, that is expert opinion. And there are definitely other studies behind the scenes that increasingly support this. The only question is, how are we consumers confronted with this? Do we know what these studies say? No, because the media play a big role in this too. We have this decisive team play of media with the industry, that we see in this topic of wireless communications, just as it was with Covid. The RKI files are one thing, you could compare the Federal Office for Radiation Protection to the RKI, they cover up – and they protect the radiation, but unfortunately not the consumers! And now we heard that the ICNIRP, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, is actually the organization to ensure that radiation protection for consumers works internationally. Where is the ICNIRP based? It's based at the Federal Office for Radiation Protection in Munich, Germany and is paid for by German taxpayers. They even get the secretaries office there for free and it's a free lobby association. This has been clearly highlighted in this report by two MEPs. One of them is Michèle Rivasi and we'll get to that later. And the other one is a German professor of physics, Professor Klaus Buchner. The two of them put this together and was able to uncover a conflict of interest with almost all the members of this international radiation protection committee. And this is the point that there are people in crucial positions who are not protecting consumers, but the industry. That is the basis of our problems. And that is why we are not properly informed. And therefore it is all the more important that there are organizations like this one and opportunities to uncover the truth. Because there's no other way. We really need a completely new perspective on facts. And as I said, it's actually getting more and more overwhelming. The next slide is the so-called STOA study. This was commissioned to the Italian Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi because her research at the Ramazzini Institute demonstrates a high level of expertise. She also has repeatedly been called to be a key witness for various other areas in the field of carcinogenesis in the USA. She is something like the number one in cancer research worldwide. And as a result, the EU Parliament commissioned her with the so-called STOA study. This is the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology. We would be talking about a technology consequence assessment. And what was the result of all this research? I also suggest another video to hear for yourselves. Also we have to understand that 5G is actually a hype so to say. this is actually good for the wireless-critical scene because the industry has overdone it with the measures and the prospects. But the effects have not only been felt since 5G. But perhaps I can summarize the contents briefly, before I have Professor Pall give his statement. In fact, they evaluated 800 existing studies and said "immediate stop of the rollout, educate the population". And I mean, have we read about that anywhere? No we haven’t. But these are really measures that would be groundbreaking for consumer protection. And they are swept under the carpet. And that's a wargame result. And with regards to that I listened to the US medical researcher Prof. Dr. Martin L. Pall, who is highly competent in this field. So what is he saying... [Video clip:] We have to look at it now in terms of what we know the other EMFs do, and that is we know that they cause huge effects on the brain including neurological, neuropsychiatric effects, we know they produce attacks on the DNA of our cells, we know they produce oxidative stress which is involved in almost all the chronic diseases, we know that they produce hormonal effects, a wide variety of sorts, we know they produce reproductive effects which are incredibly damaging. And so my prediction is 5G is gonna be worse on all of these things. And then there's cancer, which of course is a problem. And so, we are going to have really horrendous effects from 5G. And so the plan is, as you may know, is to put out tens of millions of these new antennae without doing one single biological safety test. And that is absolutely insane. [Klaus Scheidsteger:] Yeah, so I thought about what we can do since research leads to the same patterns again and again. Is there maybe a legal way to do something about it? And let me tell you, in America there are the so-called brain tumor cases and next year they are entering the 25th year of litigation. This is something like the Tobacco Road. So what we experienced with tobacco, we experience here. There are always new judges, the judges are replaced. Then there are some who are considered biased. Then there will be another 10,000 new pages for the new judge from the industry. The industry has hired 40 law firms to fight back. And this is the 25th year – so it's an anniversary. It's madness. What we really would need to do is organize consumer protection in a completely different way. And here we have the same package again, which became clear in the other presentations here today, when it comes to the WHO: The consumer is, "fooled". And this cannot go on like this. That's why I thought about it with like-minded people: Is there a legal way to do something about it? And we then commissioned a mobile phone study. We actually managed to raise the money to bring together the best people who have the expertise for such things. And we have launched the so-called ATHEM-3 study. And perhaps I can briefly tell you the results. We examined people who live near a mobile phone base station and those who live some distance away. Is there a difference? And if so, what are the results of this health hazard? I may briefly read from the minutes: Both types of study showed a significant difference between people who were exposed to relatively high or low levels of the antennas serving the area. So there is a difference. The heart rate variability analysis provided evidence that no exposure-related difference can be measured during the day, but that acute and/or chronic EMF exposure [= being exposed to electromagnetic fields] during the night reduces the recovery function of sleep – exactly what we have just heard from Ivo. The chromosome analysis in the blood samples provided evidence that the exposure causes DNA damage, which leads to an accumulation of chromosome damage over years. Both study teams found statistically significant relationships between adverse physical effects and exposure to external radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from mobile phone base stations. And they are recklessly planted in the landscape, even though we have clear results here, which have now been published internationally. And we're just about to tackle it. Unfortunately, the lawyer, our legal head, is seriously ill, as fate would have it. And we are still looking for a legal team. We'll see to what extent we can perhaps even coordinate this with Switzerland and so on. So a lot is possible here. And we do need a paradigm shift here. Then another personal story. I'm still okay in terms of time, I think. I hadn't quite finished my last film when I was asked to broadcast it in Brussels at the European Parliament. At that point, it was maybe 80 percent done. And in the film we had those people I just mentioned, including Michèle Rivasi and Klaus Buchner, who had uncovered these ICNIRP stories, the closeness to industry of the institutions that should actually protect us. We had a quantum physicist here who recorded alternatives in technology, namely light technology. And so in this discussion, we were invited to the European Parliament. You don't actually do that – the film wasn't finished yet – but I thought, okay, this is such a great honor. It was 80 percent finished. And that was very impressive. And two weeks later, the French MEP Michèle Rivasi passed away. It has a bitter aftertaste, but that's the way it was. And then came wargaming against myself, but not from politics, but from within my own ranks. (So-called) Consumer protection organizations, which actually are critical toward mobile communications, had found out that a new film from Scheidsteger was on its way. And this Scheidsteger did not consider us as a consumer protection organization, that can't really be good. So vanity and the such unfortunately also plays a role. And then an accusation came from our own ranks along the lines of, yes, we once saw an advertising film by this Scheidsteger for some technology company in Rosenheim. He is probably sponsored by them... such nonsense. I've always made it my policy as a filmmaker not to sign my name to things that might be used against me. But still, they tried to discredit me and then also tried to prevent the film, which was based on donations, from being completed. Then I had another screening of this movie in Zurich, Switzerland. And I was very lucky that Swiss organizations were present, who then told me, hey this is so important. We are just about to do something against wireless installations here. There are two men who spoke to me there. This is the "WIR" association and Daniel Laubscher, a spatial planner who really knows his stuff. And they are fighting these antenna installations legally. And they said, come on, let's do something together. And I have to be honest, we then premiered the movie "The Digital Dilemma" in Switzerland. We organized this almost exactly one year ago. And the Swiss friends there, I've never experienced anything like it, they put in so much efforts. We now published the film in four languages. And you can watch the movie for free in French, English, Italian and German on the website. This is a 90-minute documentary. And it's just wonderful how you could feel the old soul of the Swiss Eidgenossen, so to speak. Not with us, and now more than ever! According to this motto. Yes, and then the next bomb hit for me. After I had already been an ambassador for a technology company and therefore spread fear – so unbelievable – then came the next bomb: Now I'm together with Nazis. Exactly . And yes, welcome to the club. It's unbelievable, but this is coming from within our own ranks. Yes And that is actually very shameful. We should really try to join forces. And so, once again, many thanks to the organizers, the family, family and friends. And I hope my work has been beneficial to you. [Ivo Sasek:] Thank you very much - thank you very much - Thank you very much! I am now making another appeal here. And not just to the Swiss oath alliance, but from here to the entire world! I really implore you lawyers, you judges, you public prosecutors who still understand truth, support this man free of charge! Everything you see here is done voluntarily. There are thousands of people working during the day. And in the evening we produce these programs, this knowledge, in our free time, in our vacation. It costs an infinite amount of money, such a movie. This expertise, you can't even add it up. I really implore you, you lawyers, above all, you are the front line now – you are asked to step into the breach here. That all this work is not left for us laypeople to do. Continue to work with Mr. Brunner, with him and ... serve them voluntarily for free. Do what you can to ensure that this knowledge finds the people, that it succeeds. All the best to you. And watch these movies, watch these movies! Cell phone and Wi-Fi radiation harms people, animals, the environment. We need radiation-free zones! ASZA.org [Lois Sasek:] I would now like to draw your attention briefly to a film on the same subject, which is being broadcast today on kla.TV, a very alarming documentary about Stockholm in many languages. In fact, Stockholm is a pioneer of 5G and is described as the city with the best 5G experience in Europe. But in this documentary the people have their say and I can tell you, it's a picture of horror. [Video clip:] It was an extreme pain that I had never felt before in my life. It was the most intense pain I have ever experienced. And that happened a few times. I thought I was going to die. So I came across the connections and realized that something was wrong with the antenna. This is dangerous. I have to get out of here. [Lois Sasek:] Yes, people have fallen ill just within a few days. Heart palpitations, headaches, sleep disorders, exhaustion, short-term memory loss, etc. We have heard everything, including from Mr. Scheidsteger. And it's simply a cry for help from Sweden. And at this point I would like to refer briefly to the beginning of this conference, because everyone can add their own little piece here. And together, everything becomes possible. That means we can also spread this cry for help, for example. Or spread Mr. Scheidsteger's films, because people are fighting for their lives here. They have to flee their homes because of the deadly radiation. And I say the same thing will happen to us if we don't stop this madness. And so I say to all of you please, let's spread the word about these important documentaries. And I would like to point this out again. Dad said it earlier, it's all voluntary work. We do all this in our free time. I would like to invite you, all you guests, even if you are here for the first time, for example next Wednesday we will be offering hands-on activities again. You can join in online, wherever you are. You can help. A group, for example, will distribute this documentary together. We send it to all kinds of people. We have strategies. We do what we can because it's so censored. But we will also secure sources, because sources are constantly disappearing. We will do research together. There are different groups. You can find out more at www. kla.tv/mitwirken/#en. Here you can see the different groups. Take a quick note of the link and look for a participation offer that appeals to you. You can also talk to your AZK contact person about it. They can also put you in touch. And anyone can help out, put a little something in there. And if you register here, you will then be invited and you will also receive the data. People from Africa take part. No matter from which countries, with which language. There were somehow, I think, 20 people from Africa, from different regions. I say the leadership teams are looking forward to seeing you. We look forward to your help. And so we can simply do something about these abuses in a very practical way. We have heard it again, these are great grievances. I'll briefly pass on the next contributor evenings, because we've been having them every two weeks all summer. Once July 30 at 7 p.m., Wednesday once in two weeks later, August 14 at 7 p.m. and August 27 at 7 p.m.. We look forward to seeing you!

from -

Sources/Links: Creative Commons Lizenzen https://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/