An alternative medium surprised today with a story about the “patented chip monitoring of those injected with genes”. Admittedly, so many conspiracy theories have come true in recent years that it is quite possible to get a little insane. With news of this quality, however, the bullshit-o-meter should kick in with critical people – and for good reason. And one more time we go on a fact check before the censorship institutes do this, for whom it has once again been made very easy.
A comment by Willi Huber
Specifically, it was one more time the weekly look, who literally wrote of a “horror patent” that vaccinated people were monitored by means of a chip via artificial intelligence with servers and apps. Corresponding rumors have been circulating in the resistance for a long time: What if the vaccination also injects markers or even chips that can be used to determine whether you have been vaccinated at all? What if you are injected with mysterious substances that form structures in the human body, which then establish network connections using WLAN? Indeed, such ideas can be completely maddening. If all of that were true, the reality would be far more terrible than it already presents itself.
The real crimes of the rulers are enough …
It is enough, however, what the governments do to us in terms of real, really observable things, be it masks, tests, compulsory vaccination, bullying, deprivation of basic rights and much more. The unbelievable child abuse alone, the psychological pressure that catches up with our little ones and will likely shape their lives, is a monstrous crime. You don’t have to get confused with dubious science fiction fairy tales, which are technically far above anything humanity can achieve in 2021. We look carefully – come with us. Let’s expose fake news, which are causing immeasurable damage to the resistance to forced vaccinations and nonsensical corona policy, because it allows the other side to label all opponents of vaccinations and measures as confused mentally ill people.
Keep Calm. Turn on your brain. Do your own research.
You can see the quoted Patent 20210082583 but just read through it in peace. What the former colleagues have completely hidden in their article is the fact that in this patent it is mentioned from the first to the last line that people are equipped with a technical device, which does nothing but the controversial “Stop Corona” app of the Red Cross, to implement it, presumably large sums of tax money were shoveled on to party supporters. The “abstract” already describes this unmistakably. It is also not a specifically patented, ready-made solution, but a trivial patent that is possible in the USA. A principle, an idea was patented, whereby a level of invention is not really recognizable for a technically experienced person.
Creative interpretations and research errors
Hardly anything is actually right in said article, not even the date on which the patent was filed (actually on November 30, 2020). On August 31, 2021, it was published and accepted, as you can see very nicely here on google patents can read. The first pictures, which explain the functional principle, make it clear what it is about: When infections become known, the movement profile of people is used to calculate whether someone could have been infected by a spreader or super-spreader. It is simply the principle of the corona warning apps that many of us got played on our cell phones against our will – without them ever having worked in any country we knew about. In fact, things got very, very quiet around these warning apps after having wasted millions and millions of dollars on them around the world.
Who is behind the patent?
It is also claimed that in “Patent Section 035” vaccination or treatment instructions are sent via app. In fact, the section contains the following information:
 ii. when in proximity of another such electronic device, one or both of transmit said ID or an indication thereof to said another electronic device and receive an ID or indication thereof from said another electronic device;
To get an idea of the quality of a patent, it would also be useful to look at who the submitting people are and what they have done so far. So far, the patent smells like something that would never have made it to patentability in Europe. Namely, simply to try extorting money from third parties using an already known principle by pretending to hold the patent on it. In the USA this is quite possible – and if you have the right lawyers, comparisons are often made as to where the companies concerned would rather pay than take the unclear risk of litigation.
Two people are listed, namely “Gal Ehrlich” and “Maier Fenster”. Both operate the in Israel Law firm “Ehrlich & Fenster”who specializes in patents and trademark rights.
In Europe you would never get a patent for such “ideas”
An example of what a trivial patent looks like, which has the sole purpose of blackmailing other companies who develop and offer solutions and products through their own innovation:
Personalized internet interaction
A method of a user interacting with an Internet, comprising: tracking interactions of the user with an Internet; analyzing said tracked interactions to determine at least one aspect of a user’s interaction with the Internet; and modifying future interactions of said user with said Internet, responsive to said determined aspect, wherein said modified interactions comprise site-content related interactions with a plurality of unrelated sites. Preferably, the aspect is adapted in real-time to reflect changes in the tracked interactions.
In our example, the law firm has “patented” what is used by almost every website worldwide and triggered by every internet user. Log and react to a person’s actions on the Internet. Every internet user encounters this functional principle on a daily basis, for example through customized advertisements from Google and Amazon. We cannot determine on an ad hoc basis whether Maier Fenster or the Ehrlich Group actually generates sales from these ideas. It gives the impression that the company’s business principle is to “be the first” to patent things that have already been invented and conceived by others. What one can, however, rule out with a probability bordering on certainty is that the patents of the rulers have any real value for mankind, should be implemented or were created on behalf of a relevant technology company. I can guarantee you, dear readers, that if the pharmaceutical industry wants to make money with a patent, the process will certainly not go through a tiny law firm in Ramat-Gan.
Senseless and misleading confusion with other technologies
Now you go along in the said article and mix this unimportant trivial patent with nanoparticle vaccinations and magnetic field patents for targeted chemotherapy. Not only that these patents and technologies have nothing to do with each other and are not held by the same companies. As if that weren’t enough, they dig out a patent with “transgenes, not human mammals” from 1988 and an obscure letter on “cryptocurrency systems that use data from physical activities”. So it is very surprising that the patent for the electric chair was not used, after all, that is also a US patent and must have something to do with it. OK, Sherlock …
What the author always describes as “approved”, is nothing more than the fact that these papers were archived as the authors’ “own creation”. On this basis, legal action can be taken against “patent infringers” (in the USA). In the present case, for example, against the Austrian Federal Government, the Austrian Red Cross and the implementing company Accenture. Such a patent says nothing about actual plans for implementation. The patent cited here essentially relates to anonymized contact tracing. The fact that one could subsequently use one for vaccination plans is an application example, but not part of the patent.
Karen Kingston guarantees hair-raising fake news
Incidentally, the quoted “expert” Karen Kingston has been churning out bullshit reports about allegedly dangerous patents in the pharmaceutical industry. A few days ago, you excited the world with a “Pfizer patent” with which contact can be made with graphene compounds in vaccinated persons using “quantum microwaves”. There is no human technology that could do something like this. The criticized article in Wochenblick started with Karen Kingston. It is a faulty translation of this article from worldviewweekend.com. In a direct comparison (and this is where the above-mentioned error becomes apparent):
Section 0350 of the patent application states that the technology is designed to be used to order vaccines be injected as a “treatment.” It states: “In some embodiments, the term prophylactic treatment means a preventive measure taken to fend off a disease or another wanted consequence.”
This is cited in the Patent section 035. It’s about the preventive Treatment to avert illness or other consequences.
Direct comparison between original and copy
Do not abuse the hard-earned trust of the readers
You really have to ask yourself where such scare tactics in alternative media are going to lead to. Because this group of media professionals has laboriously built up people’s trust over the years. Now churning out half-silk articles to get quick clicks may lead to success in the short term – but in the long term the damage to credibility is immense. It makes it especially easy for the censorship agencies called “fact checkers” to be branded as distributors of fake news. In addition, many people do not read articles carefully from beginning to end, but at best notice the title and introduction as presented on social media. The resulting picture is catastrophic, especially in the present case. It shouldn’t be surprising if at some point critical minds raise the question of a controlled opposition.