History tells us that the Spanish Flu in 1918 killed between 50-100 million people. It was considered as the most horrifying disease by medical and pharmaceutical sources. It is a wartime myth still being perpetuated to coverup the experimental military vaccines which killed millions during the Spanish Flu.
Must Watch: Would you live on 3D Printed Mars for a year for $60,000?
Eleanor McBean, PhD, N.D., the author of ‘Vaccination Condemned‘, describes her personal and family experiences during the 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic in detail in her book.
The coverage by McBean who is an unvaccinated survivor will let you revisit this historical event. McBean provides evidence that the historical events of the 1918 “Spanish Flu” were compromised.
The same was done with the Polio and Swine Flu epidemics and which is also being done now.
Myth of the Spanish Flu
Since Spain was neutral during World War 1, it did not hesitate to report the 1918 Flu epidemic, unlike the combatting countries.
Subscribe to GreatGameIndia
So, Spain was ‘scapegoated’ as the source and hence the name ‘Spanish Flu’ was coined.
A massive military vaccination experiment was conducted in Fort Riley, Kansas – where the first “Spanish Flu” case was reported.
For the first time the pharmaceutical industry got the supply of human test subjects which was sponsored by Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research.
The US military supplied a pool of 6 million men as test subjects for the vaccination experiments.
WW1 U.S. soldiers were given 14 – 25 untested, experimental vaccines within days of each other, which triggered intensified cases of ALL the diseases at once.
The doctors called it a new disease and proceeded to suppress the symptoms with additional drugs or vaccines.
Autopsy done after the war proved that the 1918 flu was not a ‘flu’. It was instead the disease caused by the experimental ‘bacterial meningitis vaccine’ which was given to the people.
This disease mimics the symptoms just as flu. A large number of vaccinated soldiers were killed by this experimental vaccine and those who were not vaccinated were not affected.
But what about the Civilians?
Huge quantities of unused experimental vaccines were left unused as WW1 ended abruptly.
The US government started the campaign of spreading fear among the civilians saying that when the soldiers will return to their families the disease will spread to the family members as well.
And by doing this they succeeded in using tens of millions of civilians as test subjects for experimental vaccines. As a result millions of civilians died after wartime, just as the soldiers did.
Hence instead of reducing the risk, it intensified the situation and it was termed as the great ‘Spanish Flu of 1918’ in which only the vaccinated died.
“Seven men dropped dead in a doctor’s office after being vaccinated. Letters were sent to their families that they had been killed in action.”
– Eleanor McBean, Minnesota Wellness Directory
Recently, in a similar fashion the WHO’s oral vaccine sparked a Polio outbreak in Africa.
A week after World Health Organisation (WHO) declared that its decade-long vaccination campaign in Africa was successful, its own oral vaccine itself sparked a new Polio outbreak in the continent. The outbreak was been caused by mutation of strain in vaccine.
The COVID Narrative
Neil Ferguson, is the British scientist and professor at The Imperial College, who developed mathematical pandemic computer models for covid-19 based on which national policies were drafted.
However, all the models provided by Neil Ferguson have proven to be misleading and still the world is following his COVID-19 model.
For instance, as per Ferguson model Sweden would experience 100,000 deaths by June 2020 but Sweden peaked only at 2854 deaths total till now (as of writing this article).
The case of Sweden is interesting because the strict lockdowns prescribed by the WHO were not implemented by the Swedish government. The Swedish Model has proven the ineffectiveness of WHO COVID policies.
There’s also the case of Germany where the federal minister hired scientists to develop a fake coronavirus model to justify strick lockdowns.
After a strong fight by activists and lawyers, German court in a landmark ruling declared COVID19 lockdowns imposed by the government were unconstitutional.
WHO’s policies on the type of drug for treatment of COVID-19 were also exposed to be influenced by fake data by a pornstar and a science fiction writer.
The fake corona models were further complement with faulty test protocols.
As GreatGameIndia reported earlier, the standard coronavirus tests threw up a huge number of positive cases daily. These tests are done based on faulty WHO protocols which are designed to include false positives cases as well.
It was only a year later when the pandemic was already declared strict lockdowns imposed worldwide that the WHO admitted its mistake and changed its RT-PCR test criteria.
Last year, a Portuguese appeals court had ruled that PCR tests are unreliable and that it is unlawful to quarantine people based solely on a PCR test.
The threshold cycles used in PCR tests in India is between 37 and 40, which makes the reliability of the PCR test less than 3% and the false positive rate as high as 97%.
Earlier, the WHO’s testing protocol was even questioned by Finland’s national health authority. WHO had called on countries to test as many patients as possible for coronavirus.
In a startling disclosure, Finland’s head of health security, Mika Salminen dismissed WHO advisory saying the WHO doesn’t understand pandemics and that their Coronavirus testing protocol is illogical and doesn’t work.
So, if the WHO’s testing protocols are indeed based on the most reliable, accurate and well sourced technologies and research methodologies available worldwide, shouldn’t they have known about its negligible effectiveness and its impact in causing panic and chaos?
Indeed the WHO knows it doesn’t work and moreover this is not the first time such criticisms have been voiced.
In the past in 2010, the WHO was caught faking a pandemic and was forced to admit that its methodology of measuring the virality or the spread of the disease, instead of its severity was incorrect.