This Pfizer patent application was approved August 31st, 2021, and is the very first patent that shows up in a list of over 18500 for the purpose of remote contact tracing of all vaccinated humans worldwide who will be or are now connected to the “internet of things" by a quantum link of pulsating microwave frequencies of 2.4 gHz or higher from cell towers and satellites directly to the graphene oxide held in the fatty tissues of all persons who’ve had the death-shot.
Further it reveals a system for contact tracking, rating and automatically "drugging" people. Further it can generate a unique ID by contact with a central server.
I had a quick scan through the PDF, though nowhere near read it all.. So, yeah it's about a system of automatic contact tracing, giving people a score based on their detected number/type of contacts and any of their medical data the system has access to, also including using mobile phone microphones to detect if they have a cough, or regularly wash their hands.. then automatically prioritise people for vaccination based on all this, and give them instructions to go get vaccinated.
I couldn't see anything about a capability to automatically drug people (if I correctly understand what you're saying Tycho? What do you mean by 'automatically'?)
And FWIW I could only see it talking about using devices such as mobile phones to perform this contact tracing..though that was an "including but not limited to" type example, so, yeah it could potentially mean anything, like turning people into computers with a graphene network in their bodies etc.. but is that a given? Does anyone (other than the PTB) actually have any idea how that might work, technically?
So, it's not that I think you're necessarily wrong... and it's still all very nasty stuff... but, were there specific parts of the patent that read like it includes the technology to automatically drug people? Can you post some of the specific text that made you think that?
Basically what I'm saying is, I wouldn't put any of what you're saying past "them", if they can do it... but I think you might be getting carried away a bit, saying things as fact that we don't actually know. Do correct me if I'm wrong. S'just how it seems to me!