In his latest program, Kla.TV founder Ivo Sasek gave 40 reasons why he does not pay the
Serafe, the compulsory media levy in Switzerland.
High-ranking experts categorized the reporting of the forced media in the D-A-CH countries as criminal
and extremely harmful to the welfare of the people.
This reveals a double-edged sword:
The obvious side of this is that those who refuse to pay will face criminal prosecution.
However, the hidden side includes the fact that people are legally prohibited from
participating financially in criminal activities.
In Austria, the new ORF household fee has replaced the previous GIS fee since 2024 and is
collected by ORF-Beitrags Service GmbH (OBS).
As Kla.TV already revealed in the documentaries Die Akte ORF - Korruption und Verflechtung im großen Stil and Die Akte ORF -
Versteckte Einflussnahme, there is also reason not to pay the ORF compulsory fee in order not to be
complicit in the financing of a "criminal organization":
● Top ORF salaries cause outrage among the population
● Dependence on corporations undermines the independence of ORF
● Large-scale political integration undermines control function
● Manipulated reporting in favor of politics: Resignation of ORF2 editor-in-chief and ORF regional director
In October 2023, the Austrian Constitutional Court even ruled that ORF was operating unconstitutionally due to
the unauthorized political appointments to its boards.
ORF was also caught censoring live in October 2023.
The well-known ski racer Benni Raich was instructed by the ORF director not to say
anything more during an interview on climate issues.
See also the relation: We ski on about 10 glaciers in Austria, but we probably have 500 or more, so that's a very large number
And the glaciers are receding everywhere and when you see these pictures
"Stop!" it said. Stop what? I'm not supposed to say anything more.
Despite all the uncovering work, despite the ongoing exposure of the scandals presented as conspiracy theories,
the ORF is unwilling to regulate its reporting to TRUE.
Do those responsible lack the courage to admit their mistakes and draw the consequences,
or are there other reasons for this behavior?
The recent ORF report on the RKI scandal provides another reason to withhold the household tax.
The RKI protocols released by the German online magazine "Multipolar" have caused great outrage among the population.
Now the German media felt compelled to report on it.
ORF also reported with a time delay - but the way the ZIB 2 report on March 25 was presented and, above all,
the way it was moderated by Armin Wolf, was tendentious, manipulative and by no means objective.
But see for yourself.
Armin Wolf: "And to Germany, where secret protocols from the first months of the pandemic are causing a stir.
It is about transcripts from the RKI, the Robert Koch Institute, which has been a leading advisor to the German government.
A right-wing online magazine has forced the publication of these protocols in court and opponents of the measures from back
then now feel vindicated; because of critical comments about the benefits of FFP2 masks, for example, or about lockdowns.
So-called lateral thinkers are cheering on social media - but wrongly, say the RKI and the German government.
The quotes should not be taken out of context."
Apart from this three-and-a-half minute report in ZIB 2, there was no further coverage of the RKI protocols on ORF.
As a result of this ORF report, WIR EMUs held a press conference in Linz on May 7. EMU
stands for genuine, courageous and unwavering.
The Association for the Promotion of Society and Well-being is a network of people organized on a
non-partisan basis, with mutual support and assistance.
The EMUs filed a complaint with KommAustria against ORF's reporting on the RKI protocols.
Dear viewers, this press conference was about much more than the ORF's position on the RKI protocols.
The speakers pointed out that public discourse or neutral reporting on the corona issue is still being prevented by ORF.
They complained that discussions on a factual level with media representatives and
government officials have not yet taken place.
Watch excerpts from this interesting conference.
We start with Sabine Spögler-Dinse. She worked for many years for ORF-Seitenblicke.
However, due to the 2G regulation, she was no longer allowed to enter the company from fall 2021 and lost her job after 25 years.
Now listen to how manipulative the ORF was at the time with the measures in their own house.
Sabine Spögler-Dinse: I was allowed to work until fall 2021, I was tolerated. Then, when the ORF introduced a de
facto vaccination requirement for employees, I had to leave.
But it was also the case up to this point that the measures taken during filming and moderation were simply, how shall we
put it, not consistently meaningful and dripping with reason.
We have a symbolic image here, so you can see what the working conditions might have been like.
We had to conduct interviews with two-meter-long rods, but were allowed to stand next to each other for photos afterwards.
In any case, the most important thing was always that the viewer was of the opinion that all measures made a
lot of sense and were followed by everyone everywhere.
Of course it wasn't like that. Everything was always different in the background.
They stood together, but in front of the camera they extended the two-meter rod.
Nobody was allowed to walk through the background without a mask, they were cut out immediately. The illusion was to be created
that everyone was doing everything the government prescribed.
Keyword mask: You can see that the interviewer had to wear a mask, the interviewee did not.
It was all purely arbitrary. We were given instructions: today everyone had to wear a mask, tomorrow only the
interviewers, then again outside with a mask, then again not.
So let's put it this way, it didn't really make sense.
And it was also the case that if you questioned that, you were a bit suspicious from the outset
and were quickly regarded as a lateral thinker.
And some people, thinkers, still cling to this narrative today. That all those who ask critical questions, who want
to look a little behind the façade, are lateral thinkers.
And that is exactly why we are here today, why we are sitting here.
Now listen to Bernhard Costa, the spokesperson for the EMUs. He speaks from the heart of many groups, initiatives and companies:
Bernhard Costa: And I probably also speak for hundreds of thousands of other not entirely
satisfied compulsory fee payers and ORF consumers.
So there is real power behind this complaint.
In a lengthy and expensive legal dispute, journalist Paul Schreyer succeeded in getting the RKI to publish the protocols.
And another one, Peter Hahne, a ZDF veteran, said that the RKI files show that all conspiracy theories are pure reality.
So something has happened.
This wind that has blown through the media landscape in Germany has stopped at the gates of ORF.
As a very simple person, as a fee-payer, as a worried father of three, please allow me to say a few general words in this area.
And I say it again and again and I mean it honestly: I am of the opinion, especially in difficult times, that we need a
strong, independent ORF and I would be happy to pay fees for it.
That would be worth it to me. But this ORF at the moment, not at the moment, it's been four years now,
it stands in the way of coming to terms with things.
And I say this now in no uncertain terms, in my view this is a danger, a real danger for
our society through latent, one-sided reporting.
And he is showing it again now, playing a totally inglorious role in the cover-up of what is believed to be the
biggest medical-political scandal in the history of mankind.
I think the facts that are currently on the table clearly show that.
Because the ORF does not stand for reappraisal, as has become clear in recent days and weeks, I am trying to
make a contribution to reappraisal within the scope of my emotional and civil society possibilities.
And I am personally convinced that we can only begin to come to terms with the situation when the general public really
understands what has happened here and what is still happening.
And for this reason there are now fewer words, but I will let self-explanatory pictures speak for themselves.
I'm doing this Telegram-style now, in fast-forward. But these are pictures from the
system media, because you trust the system media.
And it started in mid-2021 at the European Football Championship, where only soccer fans, but soccer fans nonetheless,
came into contact with a new event for the first time.
Namely, you're watching something on TV and suddenly an athlete keels over. And it's an isolated case.
And that continues today in 2024, when a few days ago the fastest marathon runner in
Switzerland suddenly collapsed, heart attack, dead.
But fortunately we are always transported, such events are fortunately rare and isolated cases.
And the question is: are they really isolated cases?
So I have a clear answer to that, but maybe that's just my distorted perception. I invite you to share the
perception with me and I don't want to bore you now.
I have in my research, I have about 180 pictures from the last three years, I limit myself only to the last few weeks
(!): January 16, 43 years old, died suddenly, unexpectedly.
January 22, 23 years old, track and field athlete dies
January 26, pole vault world champion, 29 years old, suddenly and unexpectedly.
January 29, Panama's record goalscorer at 41, died unexpectedly, heart attack. And so on.
I don't always say the date now. It's almost a daily rhythm:
Cardiac arrest at the age of 39, sudden and unexpected.
Shock diagnosis, national player at 28 fights for his life.
No heartbeat for an hour, Egyptian kicker in mortal danger.
Argentina pro collapses in game, blood clot.
Former team player deceased at 44 as a result of a heart attack.
Arsenal star collapses on the pitch, this is a photo also from women's soccer, where this unique event has also arrived.
On the same day, April 1, the second headline at the age of 24, a stroke suffered by a national player.
In Styria, a 24-year-old kicker dies suddenly and unexpectedly.
Match abandoned in Italy, Roma star collapses on the pitch.
At the age of 26, soccer player dies of cardiac arrest after scoring a goal.
43-year-old former boxing world champion passes away unexpectedly.
Argentina's ex-striker admitted to hospital with chest pains.
Recently in the German, I think regional league, a goalkeeper collapsed during the game and later died in hospital.
29-year-old had a heart attack, was diagnosed by a cardiologist as a result of the mRNA vaccination.
And there were a few more in the last few days, but then I finished.
On May 2, young cricket star dies at just 20 years old.
When people finally join up the dots and realize: No, it's not an isolated incident that only
happens with soccer or only happens with athletes.
These are just the things that pop up in the mainstream media. Under the surface,
there are thousands, tens of thousands of them.
I don't even want to mention the number of unreported cases.
We can only guess at terrible things, and we are not just guessing today, we have been able to guess for a long time.
We hear it all the time: "You couldn't have known any better." Yes, yes, yes, yes!
And serious doctors and serious journalists have known this and have always pointed it out.
What I'm briefly showing you behind me is a criminal complaint that our courageous lawyer Dr. Wolfgang Schmidauer
filed on behalf of us EMUs. This is from February 2022.
This criminal complaint is directed against Health Minister Mückstein and the entire vaccination committee.
I would like to spare you all the details now. But one focus of this criminal complaint was the topic of myocarditis,
thrombosis, the danger signs, especially sudden cardiac death.
And this was backed up with documents from the Paul Ehrlich Institute. In other words, not just any
faker source, but from a government advisory body.
This criminal complaint was probably not taken so seriously, otherwise something would have come out.
But just in case anyone says you couldn't have known that.
We took money in hand, made an APA-OTS release and this APA release was the most read headline in Austria for eight days.
So obviously many people have read it, but obviously no journalist from the mainstream media,
especially not from ORF. Because they never reported on it.
But what ORF has already done: Ten months later, they were still blatantly spreading fake news.
At the time, a programme was made about the side effects of vaccination and attempts were made to play it
down. And presented myocarditis and thrombosis as harmless symptoms that can be treated well.
That is a trivialization of the facts.
And that, I repeat, is a danger to our society through false or one-sided reporting.
Because by trivializing these risks, people continued to be driven into the needle.
And let's start with Günther Mayr.
Günther Mayr is head of the science editorial department at ORF.
I was told by several sources that he basically sets the narrative, the religion, which the presenters also express.
People like him have spent the last four years determining that globally recognized physicians, such as Andreas Sönnichsen
- he has defamed them and determined a new kind of medicine.
It's worth questioning in principle, but I'd like to give an example of why this person
has been churning out dangerous fake news.
Dangerous fake news!
And I would like to take the example of AstraZeneca, which is currently on everyone's lips again.
Take a quick look back with me into 2021.
German Health Minister Spahn appears before the media on March 15
- The pressure was so great, I think there were about 15 deaths at the time
- and he said: We are taking AstraZeneca off the market and no longer injecting it into
our population, it is no longer responsible.
Five days later, on March 20, a nurse also died in Austria, apparently as a result of the AstraZeneca vaccination.
And a day later, on March 21, the boss, the head of the science editorial department, goes on every ORF program from morning
to night and says, and I quote: "AstraZeneca is very, very safe.
The probability of contracting a thrombosis with the virus is much higher than with the vaccination."
I asked myself, in whose interest is he speaking? Does he believe what he's saying? Is it responsible?
Is he in the service of science? Is he in the service of the pharmaceutical lobby?
Is he in the service of the government, which still has a few million doses that need to be vaccinated? I don't know.
It's not my job to question that.
All I know is that it is irresponsible to make such statements with these facts that were already on the table at the time.
And today, now at the latest after RKI protocols, we know that this and many, many other things that this man has said,
whether it was about tests, masks or lockdowns - all fake news.
He was wrong about everything there was.
And normally in a private sector, one would say, it's part of the culture, in Japan at least, to
apologize for failure or losing your job, at least.
Do you believe that it is in the interest of Günther Mayr and his disciples at the ORF, if I may say so, that it is
in their interest to seriously review the RKI protocols?
So my answer to that is clear: no, because that would expose your own failures. You would be sawing off your own branch.
And that's why it's up to us to start the reappraisal from the outside and to force the
pressure from the civilian level, so to speak.
And I would like to thank all the remaining media outlets that are fulfilling their journalistic duty of care and helping
us to drive this issue around the ORF forward, so to speak.
Lawyer Alexander Todor-Kostic drafted the ORF complaint to KommAustria.
From the very beginning of the coronavirus measures, he was very critical, but also very supportive, especially
towards the people who suffered injustice during this time.
He was also labeled a corona denier, swearer and right-wing extremist.
Alexander Todor-Kostic: I feel elevated in the face of such fighting words.
I would have faced the media representatives and the government representatives at any time for discussions on a
factual level, but that didn't happen because, as we all know, such discussions were prevented.
It even went so far that in 2020, when we came together via the Lawyers for Fundamental Rights platform and then also connected
with doctors, such as Andreas Sönnichsen, Martin Haditsch and other thoroughly deserving personalities, we no
longer had the opportunity to convey our opinion via the media.
That was switched off.
There was a unified opinion, there was a media that was aligned, with the exception of the alternative media, which became
stronger and stronger and then really stepped in to do what the leading media, as they say, were supposed to do.
And for me, that was actually the low point of democracy because, as we all know, a democratic constitutional state
thrives on discourse and the free expression of opinion.
And the further low point was that we had to place an advertisement (!) in 2021 so that we were allowed to get our
theses and our criticism and skepticism of the measures at the time, of the federal government's
corona measures policy, out to the people at all.
We put money into it - there were also sponsors at the time who supported it.
- and we placed an advertisement about the extra-parliamentary Corona Investigation Committee,
which was published in several media outlets.
Several have refused. They also refused to print an advertisement in exchange for money.
So that was very close to a totalitarian approach, I have to say.
That's how it was, we placed this advertisement and, as a reflex, we were then confronted by these standardized media, namely by
very prominent journalists - I can now mention the name Armin Wolf, to whom we will come back, and Florian Klenk - not with the
invitation to deal with these issues, but as corona deniers. Quote from Armin Wolf and
fake news disseminator quote from Florian Klenk.
What did we claim in this advertisement?
We have claimed or questioned whether the mask requirement in the way it has been imposed does not do more harm than good.
We questioned the PCR tests and we opposed compulsory vaccination, which was massively denied at the time, and we warned of the
collateral damage, which I believe, according to the latest statistics, is currently estimated to
be upwards of 700 billion if you add everything up.
That was our crime, that was the fall from grace, that we were labeled corona deniers, so to speak.
We then defended ourselves against this in a group of doctors and lawyers and brought an action for an injunction
against both Armin Wolf and Florian Klenk, which we lost in both cases in the Supreme Court.
That was the low point for me as a lawyer, as an attorney, as a person with fundamental rights in a republic, in a democracy.
So I have taken note of the fact that we should all keep our mouths shut, that we shouldn't worry, but that we can put
ourselves safely in the hands of the Republic of Austria, the state, which tells us what to
think and do every day with its state power.
That was the introduction, so to speak.
The piquancy of the whole thing is that today we are once again dealing with Armin Wolf in the RKI files, which were
commendably brought to light by the online magazine Polar.
Once again, Armin Wolf is the mastermind who is now stepping back in front of the curtain, so to speak, as the person who insulted
us back then because of facts that were possibly exactly as we criticized them, and who continues to talk about opponents of
measures, about lateral thinkers, about people who are now rejoicing because they have perhaps found success
somewhere, without devoting himself to this topic with even the slightest hint of a journalistic approach.
And of course that immediately got me thinking, we can't leave it at that.
Now would be a really good time to try it again.
Because now it is not about some trifle or some side detail, about an accusation against ORF that it has violated the
requirement of objectivity somewhere - but now it is about whether public broadcasting is in a position to clear up such a
scandal, whether it has its own strength, whether it also has the self-cleaning power to act here. Or whether we are dealing
with an ORF that continues to stick to the political narrative anyway, as this last report on March 25 in ZIB 2 showed.
And to be honest, when you look at it, you have to take the view that nothing has changed.
And I believe that the ORF is acting the way it is now for good reason, because it
would be under an obligation to justify itself.
You have to imagine that the government with the ORF forced us into this situation back then.
This Corona story was never about health protection. It wasn't about that.
It was about establishing control and restricting the population in order to ultimately force them as much as
possible into this Covid-19 injection. So that was the goal.
Dear viewers, it is worth listening to Alexander Todor-Kostic's further comments on the misconduct of ORF presenter
Armin Wolf in the press conference video. His criticism of ORF also applies to other people involved:
What about the state directors who cooperate with all the state governors they have chosen beforehand?
What about the other editors who are responsible for this reporting that we had there,
where this unanimous opinion came about?
The ORF is a supervisory authority and it is not even close to that. It is the vicarious agent, not only of
the federal government, but also of the pharmaceutical industry. And that must be stopped.
We have the right, if we already have to pay ORF contributions through compulsory contributions, that
we actually get objective reporting here as well.
But ORF is so far away from this that we can't expect it to happen in the next few years.
I am also represented on a platform where we support the population against the ORF contribution.
And I can only say that as long as the ORF is not completely reformed editorially and structurally, it
will not be able to fulfill its public service mandate.
And heads need to roll. Something simply has to change fundamentally. It can no longer be achieved with cosmetics.
The author, scientist and physician Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen criticized the measures from the very beginning, and
later also the vaccination and the way people were treated.
Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen: Ladies and gentlemen, it is really quite astonishing what has now
come to light as a result of the RKI protocols.
I remember March 20, 2020, when the lockdown was just four days old in Austria. In Germany,
it had been decided, but not yet implemented.
Under my leadership, we at the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine issued the first statement.
Published with the headline: Where is the evidence?
And it was precisely these questions that were actually asked at the RKI itself.
And I find that quite astonishing.
I have to disagree a little, so to speak, because the RKI has indeed - Lauterbach is absolutely right - the RKI has done
excellent scientific work, at least in the lower departments.
They did everything right, but the fish stinks from the head.
The RKI management and the political establishment, which patronizes the RKI, so to speak, ignored it or did exactly the
opposite of what the lower departments in the RKI actually said.
Markus Haintz is a lawyer and has been a vocal critic of the coronavirus measures from the outset.
He has also been working as a journalist for some time and successfully runs his online portal Haintz.Media. Markus
Haintz: First of all, I have to agree with Alexander.
The RKI itself is basically doing a good job. The question is how this will be implemented politically.
So most of the figures, data and facts at the RKI are correct to begin with.
Only the political influence is the problem, because the RKI is a supreme federal authority.
And then when the ORF says that the RKI and the Federal Ministry of Health are saying the same thing
- the Federal Ministry of Health, the Federal Minister of Health can issue instructions to the RKI.
That is why the federal government is speaking or has spoken through the RKI. That is very important to note.
And it is quite clear why there is no interest in clearing this up: because everyone has gone along with it -
in the media, in politics, in the judiciary, in business.
So many people have taken part in this coronavirus crisis, which is being falsely referred to as the coronavirus pandemic, that
it is incredibly difficult to expect any clarification here.
You have to think about that: How do you approach the whole thing?
First of all, as I have often made clear, we must not leave it to those responsible to clarify the situation.
Above all, we must not leave them to the perpetrators. And many of these perpetrators are still in office.
And it is the same with the judiciary, they have all played along and they will play along again next time if the free media and
civil society are not loud enough and finally open their mouths.
Because I still miss that. It's not enough for many people to say: Yes, I might see it
that way too, but I don't dare to speak up.
I've noticed this again recently with my lawyer colleagues.
A lot of people say that: Yes, I think it's great what some people are doing, what I'm doing. We're all behind
you. But that doesn't help. We have to stand next to you.
It really is a huge problem that far too few people are still speaking up.
And we simply have to learn that for the future.
And of course it is also important to support the independent media because they are ultimately the mouthpiece.
It is important that the old media, the established media and public broadcasters really make it clear to
the people we work with: You are supposed to report, you are not supposed to re-educate people.
It is not your job to make policy.
It is your job to inform people and give them the opportunity to form their own opinion.
That is the job of the media.
Not to be some kind of political helper and push things through just because it is politically desirable.
We need transparency in a democracy.
If the state wants to take away our rights, which represents us, then it must justify this.
Then I would like the reasons for this to be transparent, and then it cannot happen in some private room, it cannot happen
with redacted minutes, it has to happen in a public debate.
And we need the media for this, we need the established media for this, we also need the free media for this.
Dear viewers, as was to be expected, this WIR EMU press conference was completely ignored by ORF and other mainstream media.
It was at least worth a short news item for the private broadcaster Servus TV.
However, the new media such as AUF1, RTV and Info-DIREKT fulfilled their information mandate.
They reported on it promptly and appropriately, as Kla.TV has now done.
You will find access to the full-length press conference below this broadcast.
To come back to the beginning - the double-edged sword mentioned there is still there.
This reads: EITHER no longer pay the ORF compulsory fee - this could put those who refuse to pay in trouble under criminal law.
OR continuing to pay the fee - means making yourself liable to prosecution, because financial
participation in criminal activities is prohibited by law.
How do you deal with the ORF?