The 1918 Rockefeller-US Army Worldwide Pandemic
One new historical development that has been evolving over a few years and now brought into focus because of COVID-19, is the so-called “Spanish Flu” of 1918. Recurring reports and documentation are emerging to tell us that this ‘Greatest Pandemic in History’ was not “Spanish”, not “the flu” and, not a natural occurrence but the result of human tinkering with vaccines. There surely is much more to emerge, but the accumulating evidence to date is too compelling to dismiss.
In simple terms, the emerging evidence supports postulations that the 1918 pandemic was caused by a misguided – and very experimental – Rockefeller Institute meningitis vaccination program which was initiated at Fort Riley by the US military and spread to the world from there. This essay will attempt to briefly document the evidence that is available so far. There will, of course, be many objections to the content of this essay, not only from the ideologues and trolls, but from those in high places with vital body organs requiring protection.
First, there was never any justification for associating the 1918 pandemic with Spain. The pathogen did not originate in Spain, nor was Spain the hardest hit. The most commonly-accepted “official story” as related by our MSM is that all countries but Spain had initiated severe censorship (due to the war) and thus the facts of the pandemic freely circulated only in the Spanish media, and so it was “natural” to refer to this as the Spanish Flu. From this reasoning, since we all know the US has at least 125% freedom of speech and minus the same degree of censorship, we should rename COVID-19 “The American curse”. (This may yet happen, for other more valid reasons).
In any case, the documented evidence is increasingly voluminous – and increasingly solid – that this outbreak originated at Fort Riley, Kansas, in the US. Conspiracy theorists and historical revisionists cannot change this now.
The 1918 pandemic was quite possibly the worst the world had seen, certainly for centuries. It infected about 500 million people and killed at least 50 million worldwide. The current “official narrative” (again) is that it was caused by “an H1N1 virus that originated in birds” (which is not a ‘flu’ in any case), and its only tenuous connection with the US was that it was “first identified in the US in military personnel” in the spring of 1918. These claims appear to be false. In a 2008 report, the US NIH admitted that most of the deaths were not from ‘the flu’ nor from any bird virus but from a bacterial pneumonia.
The details of the studies corroborate this extensively, in which even Dr. Anthony Fauci says, “We agree completely that bacterial pneumonia played a major role in the mortality of the 1918 pandemic.”. In fact, it is now stated that the reason modern medical technology was never able to identify the “killer influenza strain” from this pandemic was because influenza was not the killer. It might be obvious to us today because we know that influenza attacks the young, old and immunocompromised, while the “Spanish Flu” attacked healthy people in their prime – which is what a bacterial pneumonia does.
Again, the official narrative tells us that, due to troop movements because of the war, the pathogen was spread worldwide. But the current emerging thesis is that troop movements might have been irrelevant because the Rockefellers, in their combined haste and hubris, “sent their experimental anti-meningococcal serum to England, France, Belgium, Italy and many other countries, helping spread the epidemic worldwide.” It certainly appears to be the prime suspect, and we can understand the reluctance of today’s WHO and CDC to reveal this to the popular press. As Dr. Kevin Barry wrote:
It would be much more difficult to maintain the marketing mantra of “vaccines save lives” if a vaccine experiment originating in the United States . . . caused the deaths of 50-100 million people. (and) “The American Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and its experimental bacterial meningococcal vaccine may have killed 50-100 million people in 1918-19” is a far less effective sales slogan.
The Smoking Gun
According to the 2008 National Institute of Health paper, bacterial pneumonia was the killer in a minimum of 92.7% of the 1918-19 autopsies reviewed. It is likely higher than 92.7%. The researchers looked at more than 9,000 autopsies, and “there were no negative (bacterial) lung culture results.” “… In the 68 higher-quality autopsy series, in which the possibility of unreported negative cultures could be excluded, 92.7% of autopsy lung cultures were positive for ≥1 bacterium. … in one study of approximately 9,000 subjects who were followed from clinical presentation with influenza to resolution or autopsy, researchers obtained, with sterile technique, cultures of either pneumococci or streptococci from 164 of 167 lung tissue samples.
“There were 89 pure cultures of pneumococci; 19 cultures from which only streptococci were recovered; 34 that yielded mixtures of pneumococci and/or streptococci; 22 that yielded a mixture of pneumococci, streptococci, and other organisms (prominently pneumococci and non-hemolytic streptococci); and 3 that yielded non-hemolytic streptococci alone. There were no negative lung culture results.”
Pneumococci or streptococci were found in “164 of (the) 167 lung tissue samples” autopsied. That is 98.2%. Bacteria was the killer
“The 1918 and 1919 volumes of the Journal of the American Medicine Association include many articles on the cause, prevention, and treatment of influenza. Again and again, investigators wonder at the spotty presence of B. influenzae in the ill, note its presence in healthy individuals, and observe it in other infections such as measles, scarlet fever, diphtheria, and varicella (chickenpox). In one article, the authors write, “There seems to be no justification for the belief that the epidemic was due to the influenza bacillus, which is probably a secondary invader and bears about the same relation to the influenza cases as to respiratory infections of a different sort” (Lord 1919).
This appears to be where the story begins:
Following an outbreak of epidemic meningitis at Camp Funston, Kansas, in October and November, 1917, a series of antimeningitis vaccinations was undertaken on volunteer subjects from the camp.
At that time, vaccinations (and perhaps much of medical science generally) were in their infancy, with very much unknown. In particular, Dr. Gates himself (see Note 8) notes that prior to this time, “meningococcus vaccines have not been extensively employed for prophylactic immunization, and only a few references are to be found in the literature that relate vaccination experiences.” He further relates that the few referenced cases experienced “very severe” reactions to the vaccines – which were entirely experimental.
In this case, the Rockefeller Institute, which seems to be where the experiments in opening this special compartment of Pandora’s Box originated, contrived an experimental vaccine and were understandably anxious to “see what happens”. It was apparently a rather crude anti-bacterial vaccine that was made in horses. I haven’t the medical competence to comment on the equine portion, but others more knowledgeable have suggested this might not have been the best method. One enormous advantage of the war to Rockefeller was that the US Army ballooned from little more than 250,000 to 6,000,000 men, with the “Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research” now having an enormous pool of human guinea pigs to conduct vaccine experiments.
In a 26-page paper published in July of 1918 by Dr. Fredrick L. Gates, M. D., First Lieutenant, Medical Corps, U. S. Army, writing from the Base Hospital, Fort Riley, Kansas, and The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, Dr. Gates outlines the procedure.
For the determination of dosage and the study of reactions and antibody formation, six groups of about 50 men each were chosen from the various companies in the regiment. Successive groups received increasing doses of vaccine in a series of three injections at 4 to 10 day intervals. The determination of the dosage of vaccine for subsequent groups followed from the reports of the reactions produced by the given doses. It was considered important to increase the doses gradually in order to locate closely the zone of mild reactions and to avoid unexpectedly severe results.
The occurrence of an occasional reaction of greater severity even with the smaller doses, and increasing local tenderness after the injection of the larger doses of vaccine led to the choice of relatively lower doses for the general series throughout the camp rather than the attempt to push the dosage up to the limit of endurance. Later experience fully justified this decision. The preliminary series of vaccinations, therefore, served to establish the method of injection, the proper dosage for extended vaccination, the reactions which might be expected to follow the chosen doses, and the production of immune bodies in the serum of vaccinated men. On the basis of these findings the vaccine was offered to the camp at large.
“Heretofore meningococcus vaccines have not been extensively employed for prophylactic immunization, and only a few references are to be found in the literature that relate vaccination experiences.”
Those few references listed apparently experienced severe reactions, all of which indicates this was truly an experiment intruding on ground not before traveled.
The results were not long in coming.
“… Fourteen of the largest training camps had reported influenza outbreaks in March, April, or May, and some of the infected troops carried the virus with them aboard ships to France … As soldiers in the trenches became sick, the military evacuated them from the front lines and replaced them with healthy men. This process continuously brought the virus into contact with new hosts – young, healthy soldiers in which it could adapt, reproduce, and become extremely virulent without danger of burning out.
… Before any travel ban could be imposed, a contingent of replacement troops departed Camp Devens (outside of Boston) for Camp Upton, Long Island, the Army’s debarkation point for France, and took influenza with them. Medical officers at Upton said it arrived “abruptly” on September 13, 1918, with 38 hospital admissions, followed by 86 the next day, and 193 the next. Hospital admissions peaked on October 4 with 483, and within 40 days, Camp Upton sent 6,131 men to the hospital for influenza. Some developed pneumonia so quickly that physicians diagnosed it simply by observing the patient rather than listening to the lungs…”
I would say here that all indications are that this event was accidental. There may well have been hubris and ‘god-like’ imaginings at the Rockefeller Institute, but I am not in a position to make such accusations. From everything I have seen in researching this subject and, while I cannot speak for Rockefeller, the US military appears to have approached this with sincerity, good intentions, and high hopes of staving off meningitis infections in their troops. I have referenced above the paper by Dr. Gates that was written in 1918, and have studied it repeatedly. From those readings, I recognise no hint of deception or cover-up, no recklessness, no disdain for the lives of the soldiers, and no attempt (as we see with vaccines today) to minimise or discard the dangers of adverse reactions. The entire tone of his paper is one of an intelligent and educated medical officer sincerely documenting the situation of a dangerous pathogen and his efforts to eliminate it. He is careful in his statements, he documents the care in administering minor and increasing doses of the vaccine and monitoring their effects at every stage. From everything I have learned, I could find no fault with the US military in this ‘experiment’, except perhaps the fact that it was an experiment. The faults, disdain, cover-ups and deception came later.
My reading of the aftermath is that both the Rockefeller Institute and the US military (after conducting their thousands of autopsies) fully realised what had happened and, in humanly-understandable terms in the face of the calamity they had inadvertently unleashed, decided the most prudent course was to bury the truth rather than face the recriminations of an already war-weary world. Let’s not forget this pandemic killed more people than did the war itself, by a very large margin. In that situation, what would you do? Can you see the headlines in the NYT and London Times, reading “Whoops!”. I believe that this pandemic became the ‘flu’ and ‘Spanish’ because it disguised both the origin and the pathogen itself, steering the world’s public in wrong directions and blaming everything on nature. But perhaps after more than 100 years, it is time for the US to show a bit of courage and integrity and tell the truth. There is after all a first time for everything.
The Inevitable “Chinese Coolies”
There is one other aspect to this that requires mention: the attempt by some individuals to lay the blame for this event on China. The accusation itself is too stupid to warrant refuting, but I will briefly deal with it because it is one element of a large category of history that demands public revelation – that of Jewish slave trading.
The connection with this topic to the 1918 pandemic is the theory first promulgated by a Canadian historian named Mark Humphries from Canada’s Memorial University of Newfoundland, who wrote that newly unearthed records confirm that one of the side stories of the war – the mobilization of 96,000 Chinese laborers to work behind the British and French lines on World War I’s Western Front – may have been the source of the pandemic. While Humphries acknowledges that his hypothesis awaits confirmation, the National Geographic couldn’t wait and, in an article written by Dan Vergano – they published the accusation as “about as close to a smoking gun as a historian is going to get”.
That wouldn’t be so bad, but this is only 1% of the picture of Chinese “laborers” working “behind the lines” at the oddest places in the world. It needs to be told that the International Jews responsible for China’s opium century – Rothschild, Sassoon, Kadoorie, Hardoon, and many more, were also responsible for kidnapping and transporting as slaves millions of Chinese from Fujian and Guangdong for at least 150 years – the reason we have Chinese all over the world.
Few are aware that the Panama Canal was built primarily by Chinese slaves kidnapped by Jewish slave traders and shipped to Central America. That is the reason that even today more than 10% of the population of Panama is Chinese. The same was true for the Great Panama Railroad, interestingly documented by tales that after completion all the Chinese committed suicide. The story was that once the Railroad was built, the Chinese ‘laborers’ began smoking opium and all killed themselves, some apparently by cutting off their own heads. As James Bond would say, “Well, that’s a neat trick”. I should point out that the symptoms of smoking opium are pacific, not violent, and nobody is likely to cut off their own heads, impale those same heads on a spike, or hang themselves with their own hair.
It was the same with the railroads in both Canada and the US, where (as with the HSBC bank) the names were Scottish but the money was all Jewish, and countless thousands of Chinese were kidnapped and sent to North America to build the railroads for their Jewish friends – after which most were massacred.
The connection with the 1918 pandemic is the approximately 150,000 Chinese “laborers” who “voluntarily” went from Shandong to Europe to assist in the war effort. This by itself is ridiculous. The Chinese in Shandong had enough trouble with the Jews selling opium and the Japanese gobbling up their country to care about some stupid war halfway around the world. What happened was that the International Jews had infiltrated themselves so thoroughly into China that they controlled Chiang Kai-Shek and more importantly Harvard-educated T.V. Soong and, after establishing a Rothschild-owned Central Bank, were in the process of looting every penny from China. In the midst of this, and with the war now a reality, they prevailed upon Chiang and Soong to kidnap yet more Chinese to be used as slave labor and cannon fodder for their war in Europe. Chiang obliged, and the Chinese citizens were forcibly conscripted as always.
They were sent first to Canada, transported across the country to the Atlantic, then shipped to Europe where nearly all of them died. This is the issue. “Historians” (primarily Jewish) have suddenly discovered that the Chinese who were shipped to Canada and Europe came not only with their luggage but with the “Spanish flu”, ready to infect the world. The documented evidence is of course non-existent, but then Jewish historical novels seldom rely on evidence. One Jewish historian tells us that at the time China was suffering from something that “just must have been” the Spanish flu, with at least 150 miles along the Great Wall suffering from this infection. Well, Beijing is like every other cold climate in the world in that we will find colds and the flu in winter, so nothing special here. But what we actually had was one Chinese at mile zero, one at mile 150 and one at mile 300, and thus we have infected Chinese for at least 300 miles.
The next part tells us that when the “infected” Chinese were in Canada waiting for transportation to Europe, they were housed in internment camps “surrounded by barbed wire”. Even worse, while on the 8,000 km. train trip across Canada, their carriages were locked to protect them from “anti-Chinese sentiment”. That’s cute. Would this be like the American Wild West, where gangs of marauding Canadians would be mounted on horseback and chasing down trains so they could mount them and beat up the hated Chinese passengers? There was no anti-Chinese sentiment extant to justify such outrageous measures. The Chinese were indeed in locked carriages, and for the same reason they were in internment camps with barbed wire – so the ungrateful kidnapped slaves couldn’t escape.
The theory is further embellished that many of the kidnapped Chinese were ill, conveniently with the Spanish flu, and thus carried it from the Great Wall to Europe. No indication of how it migrated to Fort Riley. And of course, the reason the Spanish flu didn’t affect China was because all Chinese had already been infected and were immune. I was always a fan of Science Fiction, but it occurs to me that Medical Fiction may be even more exciting.
There is so much effort today to attribute the ‘Spanish flu’ to the Chinese – by Jewish historians – as there also is to attribute Europe’s Bubonic Plague to the Chinese – by the same Jewish historians. This really needs to end, and the best method is to name and identify all those responsible. Perhaps the time has finally arrived for the world to know the truth of a great many things.
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 28 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English-language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. His full archive can be seen at https://www.moonofshanghai.com/ and http://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/ He can be contacted at: email@example.com.
1. Deaths from Bacterial Pneumonia during 1918–19 Influenza Pandemic
John F. Brundage* and G. Dennis Shanks†
Author affiliations: *Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA; †Australian Army Malaria Institute, Enoggera, Queensland, Australia
4. PDF of Fort Riley Study 
5. American Experience, “The First Wave”, PBS
 Bacterial Pneumonia Caused Most Deaths in 1918 Influenza
 J Infect Dis. 2008 Oct 1; 1987: 962–970. Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for Pandemic Influenza Preparedness David M. Morens, Jeffery K. Taubenberger, and Anthony S. Fauci
 A REPORT ON ANTIMENINGITIS VACCINATION
 Public Health Rep. 2010; 125(Suppl 3): 82–91. The U.S. Military and the Influenza Pandemic of 1918–1919; Carol R. Byerly, PhD
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.