A Critique of the Bird Flu Narrative, By Chris Knight (Florida)

American Thinker published an article titled "Covid Redux: The Bird Flu Scare" by Janet Levy, offering a compelling critique of the emerging bird flu narrative and its parallels to the Covid-19 pandemic.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/03/covid_redux_the_bird_flu_scare.html

The piece argues that the H5N1 bird flu outbreak, hyped by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a looming 2025 pandemic, is not a natural crisis but a manufactured scare with sinister undertones. Levy suggests that globalist forces—pharmaceutical giants, government agencies, and international bodies like the WHO—are exploiting fear to push ineffective vaccines, control food supplies, and erode freedoms, much like they did with Covid. This perspective deserves support for its bold scepticism, rooted in historical precedent and a sharp eye for systemic agendas.

Levy begins with the WHO's alarming statistics: H5N1 has killed 460 out of 950 human cases over 22 years—a 48 percent mortality rate that sounds terrifying. Yet, she rightly notes that human-to-human transmission remains unproven, casting doubt on the immediacy of a pandemic threat. Instead, she points to a suspicious playbook: fear amplified by media, PCR tests prone to false positives (a Covid echo), and a rush to vaccinate—not humans directly this time, but the food chain. This shift in focus, targeting poultry and livestock with vaccines, could destabilise food security, a consequence Levy frames as potentially intentional.

The article's backbone is its accusation of bioengineering. Levy cites allegations from figures like Peter Baker, who claims H5N1 was gain-of-function enhanced at labs like the University of Wisconsin's Kawaoka facility and the USDA's Southeast Poultry Research Lab in Georgia, with a "strategic leak" in 2022. This isn't fringe speculation—gain-of-function research has a documented history, from the NIH's funding of Wuhan experiments to past lab leaks like SARS in 2004. If true, it's a damning indictment of reckless science, and Levy's call for a Trump-led investigation into these labs, including possible Chinese PLA infiltration (per Col. Lawrence Sellin), is a practical step toward accountability. The public's been burned before; supporting this demand is supporting transparency.

Levy also shines a light on the vaccine angle, and here her case grows stronger. She highlights a $590 million Moderna contract under Biden and the USDA's approval of a Zoetis bird flu vaccine—both tied to a web of players like Pfizer, BlackRock, and the Gates Foundation. These vaccines, she argues, could let H5N1 mutate in vaccinated flocks, entering the food chain and risking human transmission—a plausible fear given how flu viruses evolve (e.g., H1N1's 2009 jump). Cancelling these contracts, as she urges, isn't anti-science—it's pro-prudence, protecting against a repeat of Covid's rushed, profit-driven jab rollout.

The broader context bolsters her stance. The WHO, WEF, and CEPI—Gates-funded all—have long primed "Disease X" as the next big threat, conveniently slotting bird flu into that role post-Covid. GAVI's 2021 prediction of bird flu as "Disease X" smells like a script, not a coincidence. Levy's framing of this as a "plandemic" aligns with Covid's overreach—lockdowns, surveillance, and economic havoc sold on shaky data. If bird flu follows suit, targeting food instead of people directly, the fallout could be worse: mass culls, shortages, starvation. Her warning isn't hyperbole; it's a logical extrapolation from a system that's already flexed its muscle.

Critics might scoff—H5N1's lethality is real, and vaccines could save lives. But Levy's not denying the virus; she's questioning the response. South Korea managed H5N1 outbreaks since 2003 with culls and monitoring, not mass vaccination or panic (FAO, 2023). The U.S. could do the same without gambling on untested shots or lab-leak cover-ups. Her scepticism isn't anti-vaccine—it's anti-exploitation, a stance Trump's administration could champion to cut through globalist noise.

In short, Levy's article is a rallying cry worth backing. It's not about denying science but demanding it serve people, not power. The bird flu scare, with its Covid echoes—fear, control, profit—feels too familiar to ignore. Supporting her means supporting a fight for truth, food security, and sovereignty against a machine that's already overplayed its hand once with the covid plandemic.