A German study released this week has found that the A.30 variant of the Coronavirus effectively evades the protection afforded by the Pfizer and AstraZeneca ‘vaccines’.
The A.30 variant was first identified by scientists as originating in Tanzania, and further cases were subsequently found in Sweden and Angola around autumn (NZ time).
The study published in the peer-reviewed journal Cellular & Molecular Immunology, concluded that the A.30 variant showed improved ability to enter most host cells, including kidney, liver, and lung cells.
The summary stated:
[the] A.30 exhibits a cell line preference not observed for other viral variants and efficiently evades neutralization by antibodies elicited by ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AstraZeneca] or BNT162b2 [Pfizer] vaccination.”
Former Democratic Presidential candidate and Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard calls out the Biden Administration’s continued prosecution of whistleblower Julian Assange.
In a video posted on social media yesterday, Gabbard said that success in the extradition proceedings would be a ‘further nail in the coffin of democracy. She also criticised Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland for their increasing authoritarianism. She made no mention of Vice President Kamala Harris, whom she famously ‘took down’ in the Presidential debates in 2019.
The increasingly authoritarian Biden/Garland administration is doubling down on its crusade against our constitutionally protected rights of freedom of speech, assembly, etc. by continuing its vindictive… pic.twitter.com/yjIBqcjdnO
Assange is currently in the notorious Belmarsh Prison, London, where he is awaiting the outcome of extradition proceedings brought by the United States government for alleged hacking and espionage charges.
Gabbard called the continuing prosecution an assault on freedoms, particularly freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom of assembly.
Assange faces up to 175 years in jail. The current proceedings relate to a ruling earlier in the year which denied the extradition on the grounds of Assange’s mental health. The US appealed that decision and have presented to the court a number of conditions which they will abide by, effectively trying to guarantee the whistleblower’s mental health.
However, lawyers for Assange have rejected the conditions as ‘vague’ or ‘simply ineffective’, while Amnesty International has stated they’re ‘not worth the paper they’re written on.’
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has announced today that the company formerly known as Facebook is now named ‘Meta’.
The name change had been signalled for weeks, and became a concrete reality today, as the company battled numerous allegations brought to light by so-called ‘whistleblowers’.
The change is also reflective of Zuckerberg’s desire to change the company’s focus from that of a social media platform to a ‘metaverse company’. According to company promotional material, the ‘Metaverse’ is a ‘place where we’ll connect and play in 3D’, or ‘the next evolution of social connection.’
Announcing @Meta — the Facebook company’s new name. Meta is helping to build the metaverse, a place where we’ll play and connect in 3D. Welcome to the next chapter of social connection. pic.twitter.com/ywSJPLsCoD
“We are a company that builds technology to connect,” Zuckerberg declared when announcing the name change on Thursday during the company’s Connect 2021 event.
“Together, we can finally put people at the centre of our technology. And together, we can unlock a massively bigger creator economy.”
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg ascends into the Metaverse during Connect 2021 Keynote pic.twitter.com/wJKqgE8MKl
— Jane "Not A Twïtter Employee" Manchun Wong (@wongmjane) October 28, 2021
The trading name ‘Meta’ was aquired by Zuckeberg in 2017 and has been operating a ‘literature science platform’ called Meta Science since, from headquarters in Redwood City, California. According to Zuckerberg, he has been thinking about rebranding Facebook for some time, at least since the company acquired Whatsapp in 2012 and later Instagram in 2014.
White sandy beaches, turquoise waters and sun – Thailand is an absolute holiday paradise for tourists from all over the world. But mass tourism is threatening Thailands biodiversity and causing massive coral die-offs.
A ban on certain suncreams is only one of the measures Thailand is taking to combat the increased destruction of coral. This is because the cnidarians also fall victim to the numerous excursion boats that drop their anchors at the bays. As a result, in 2018, the famous Maya Bay, among others, was closed and new corals were planted there again. The beach is known from the 2000 film “The Beach”, which starred Leonardo DiCaprio, and has attracted countless tourists ever since.
Nevertheless, the decision caused criticism. If a bay is closed, tourists gather at another beach. This beach would then be even more crowded and more severely damaged than it already is.
Suncreams pose a threat to the diversity of nature. They contain substances like oxybenzone, octocrylene and parabens, which bleach the corals. The problem is particularly common in tourist locations visited for swimming and diving – with almost 40 million tourists (as of 2019), this puts the corals at enormous risk.
About half of current sun creams contain substances that are toxic to corals. These reflect ultraviolet light and cause the corals to bleach. As a result, the corals die and can no longer reproduce. Instead, the use of sunscreens based on zinc is recommended, as these do not harm the corals. Violations of the ban are penalized with fines up to 2,500 €.
The pollution of the sea by plastic waste is another increasing problem in Thailand. Several volunteer organisations are organising collection campaigns in cooperation with the Tourism Association of Thailand to rid the waters of plastic. The collected rubbish is then turned into flip-flops, handbags or paddle boats.
The first ban on sunscreens was enacted by the Western Pacific island of Palau in 2018, which did not come into force until 2020, but still marked a milestone in coral protection. At the beginning of 2021, Hawaii and several other Caribbean islands joined in and banned sunscreens to protect corals.
At Maya Beach in Thailand, the corals have recovered thanks to replanting and paused tourism. To protect the corals in the long term, boats are now no longer allowed there. Tourists can now only reach the bay by land and are only allowed to stay on site for a maximum of one hour. In addition, Maya Beach remains completely closed for four months of the year so that the underwater world can recover.
Corals are a gauge of how human actions are affecting the world’s oceans. Advancing climate change, global pollution and the use of fossil fuels.
If the corals fare badly, so do the surrounding waters. According to a UNESCO study, a large part of the reefs could disappear completely by 2100. The ban on harmful sun creams can slow down further species extinction, but not stop it completely. Factors such as overfishing, rising temperatures and exhaust fumes from ships also harm the underwater world. In order to prevent further species extinction, we must not only do without bleaching sun creams, but also drastically reduce global CO2 emissions.
South African cricket authorities have held crisis talks to determine how to proceed after star player Quinton De Kock revealed he will defy team orders by refusing to take a knee prior to games in the current T20 World Cup.
In spite of reports to the contrary, the 28-year-old wicketkeeper remains part of the South Africa squad after disobeying a team directive which stated that each member of the team must take a knee prior to games at the tournament in the United Arab Emirates.
De Kock generated countless headlines in his home country and beyond after refusing to drop to a knee before Tuesday’s match with the West Indies, while also outlining beforehand that he would not be making any gesture such as raising a fist or standing to attention – suggestions offered by Cricket South Africa (CSA) as an alternative to the ‘taking a knee’ protest highlighting social inequality which has become popularized by the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement.
Temba Bavuma, South Africa’s first ever permanent black captain, admitted after learning of De Kock’s stance that he was surprised but noted that De Kock has “freedom of choice”, adding that “we can’t escape the consequences of the choices and decisions that we make”.
“I think if there are people out there who feel that certain things need a bit more clarity, then the fans, the media, should probably ask those individuals themselves,” he continued.
According to a report by The Guardian, Cricket South Africa have held multiple meetings to address the issue which they fear threatens to overshadow their participation in the competition in the hope of determining the correct course to address the issue.
But as things stand, De Kock – who is among South African cricket’s all-time top scorers in T20 internationals and a key player in the team – is available for selection for Saturday’s clash with Sri Lanka.
Following De Kock’s withdrawal from the West Indies match, his role was occupied by both Reeza Hendricks and Heinrich Klaasen as they claimed their first win of the tournament and successfully bounced back from defeat to Australia.
De Kock’s stance, though, seemed to prove a troublesome one for Bavuma when he was thrust into the media’s firing line this week – particularly given his role as being a black captain of a team coming from a country with an extremely negative history of race relations.
As a team we’re obviously surprised and taken aback by the news. Quinton is a big player for the team –not just with the bat, but the role he plays from a senior point of view,” he said.
“Not having that at my disposal as a captain was something I wasn’t looking forward to.”
“In saying that, Quinton is an adult. He’s a man in his own shoes. We respect his decision. We respect his convictions. I know that he’ll be standing behind whatever decision that he’s taken.”
While his captain has given him a pass, it remains to be seen if the CSA will follow suit – and they have until Saturday’s clash with Sri Lanka to draw their own line in the sand.
Pfizer is a ‘vaccine terrorist’. That’s the view of a special ‘Gravitas’ report by Indian international news network WION.
After watching the report (below) one is left wondering what terms the New Zealand government has agreed to with the American drug company, a company whose record of fraud and corruption puts it in the top three most evil corporations in the history of western capitalism. Why are we even doing business with a company with a track record like Pfizer? If Pfizer was a person, it would have died in prison a long time ago.
It is also raises the question of whether the Ardern government’s banning of Ivermectin was part of the commercial ‘deal’ with Pfizer. Ivermectin has been used by many governments around the world as a safe, cheap and highly effective medicine for COVID. Strangely, New Zealand GPs are prohibited from prescribing it.
Ardern’s desperate roll-out to have everyone jabbed is a programme designed to meet commercial targets. She is serving her New York masters, not us.
The jab roll-out has no rational basis in public health policy theory. Only two people with the virus have died in this ‘outbreak’, and we know for certain from the nurse caring for one, a 90 year old lady, that she had multiple co-morbitities and could have died from any of them. That leaves ONE death, from a supposedly deadly and contagious variant that has been in the community now for months.
According to the VAERS web site, which records ‘official’ numbers, the clot shot is directly responsible for 91 deaths as at 9 October. It’s well known for various reasons, from misdiagnosis, incompetence, drug company suppression and downright fraud, that only about 5% of adverse events make it onto the official government statistics, so conceivably, the death rate from the clot shots could be in excess of 1,000.
The total reported adverse events from the Pfizer jab in New Zealand is 27,648 as at 9 October.
Do the math. Anyone with half a brain can see the enormous cost to human life and well-being the Pfizer jab has caused to kiwis. But it gets better. Pfizer doesn’t have to pay a cent in compensation for its faulty product.
The taxpayer has paid for a product that Pfizer admits, in documents obtained under the Official Information Act, doesn’t stop transmission. Whatever protection it does give doesn’t last more than six months. We’ve paid for something that doesn’t work, and for which the long term health effects are unknown. The product has caused serious health and economic loss for tens of thousands of New Zealanders, and we the taxpayers, have to pay for the damage.
They say crime doesn’t pay, but producing dodgy medications under a facade of science does, handsomely.
THE WION report
In the WION ‘Gravitas’ report we see how governments are silenced, supplies are halted, and profits take precedence over saving lives.
The American pharmaceutical giant is bullying countries to submit to its demands.
Recently, Pfizer forced Argentina to put its bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings at stake, as collateral.
Eight months ago an investigation into the secret contract between Pfizer and the government of Brazil by WION revealed the following shocking terms:
Brazil had to waive sovereignty of its overseas assets in favour of Pfizer
The laws of Brazil do not apply to Pfizer
Brazil must accept any delays in delivery, without compensation. That puts the country’s most vulnerable people at the whim of corporate criminals in New York
Pfizer cannot be penalised for delaying the delivery
Pfizer is exempted from all civil liability from adverse effects or death
Eight months have passed since WION reported this and nothing has changed. Pfizer is still putting profits above public health; its still forcing governments to bend to its will.
An advocacy group has thrown up more details of what Pfizer does – it has accessed some confidential contracts the company has concluded with 9 countries. These desperate countries are being forced to make humiliating concessions to Pfizer. Six points are worth highlighting:
Pfizer has the right to silence governments. It has contractually gagged governments from pubicly revealing details of the deals they’ve struck
Pfizer controls the donations of its shots, not the country that buys them. Pfizer will decide where the shots go, even if those shots have been paid for
Pfizer has secured an intellectual property waiver for itself. If Pfizer is accused of intellectual property theft, governments will pay, not the company
If there are disputes, private arbitrators in New York and not public courts will decide on them
Pfizer can go after state assets to secure compensation
Pfizer calls the shots on all key decisions, including delivery timelines
Pfizer is silencing governments through air-tight contracts. These contracts are at the centre of everything. They can silence governments in ways hardly imaginable. The Brazilian one is a case in point. Pfizer agreed to supply its clot shot to Brazil and it sneaked a clause into the agreement to force Brazil to not share any specifics with the public about the deal. That’s basically a private company muzzling a government, and controlling the flow of important information.
Pfizer also gets to decide who will get the shot. Suppose someone wants to donate Pfizer shots to Brazil, can they do it? They cannot. The Pfizer agreement restricts Brazil from accepting donations. No one can donate Pfizer vaccines to Brazil.
What happens if Brazil does not comply with these rules? The consequences are serious. The agreement is terminated and Brazil has to pay the full contract price for any remaining contracted doses.
What happens if someone accuses Pfizer of stealing its vaccine technology? The government will be forced to defend Pfizer. At least four countries have been forced to protect Pfizer’s patent, meaning these governments are defending Pfizer for intellectual property theft, while the company is free to use anyone’s intellectual property as it pleases. Columbia is one of these victims.
What if governments want to get out of these contracts? They won’t be able to sue Pfizer at all. The matter will go to a panel of three private arbitrators in New York. Pfizer will be tried by New York law, not the laws of the land where it sells vaccines. And these countries will pay heavily if they lose an arbitration.
Pfizer can ask a government to shift control of state assets to compensate for loses. What kind of assets are well talking about here? Practically anything that a sovereign government owns, foreign bank accounts, foreign investments, commercial properties, state owned airlines, even oil companies, Pfizer can take over any or all of these.
Basically everything happens on Pfizer’s terms. Even the delivery of shots is decided by the company. In Brazil, Colombia, Albania, Pfizer gets to decide the delivery timetable, and the countries will have to agree to whatever they’re given, whenever they’re given. Pfizer gets to decide the price, it sets the delivery timelines, it accepts accountability for nothing, and if someone sues the company it’s the government that foots the bill for the damages, not Pfizer.
An MMA fighter made his opponent scream in agony with a gruesome first-round kneebar submission on UFC president Dana White’s Contender Series, earning himself a contract with the world’s most high-profile promotion.
Unbeaten Russian prospect Gadzhi Omargadzhiev secured one of the most agonizing-looking conclusions to a fight this year by beating Brazilian Jansey Silva on the showcase of talent chasing a place in the UFC by suitably violent means.
Fighting at the UFC Apex in Las Vegas, Omargadzhiev had been well on top of victim Silva when he made his opponent’s leg bend in horrific style, causing familiar UFC referee Herb Dean to become a concerned onlooker.
The action was over inside the first round when an understandably distressed Silva was unable to continue, wincing in pain as he lay flattened on the canvas.
As Dean waved proceedings off after Silva tapped out, a medical team moved in to attend to the stricken fighter – leaving fans unable to contain their shock at the savaging they had seen.
“Good lord,” said one account sharing the fearsome footage, adding a “holy sh*t” for good measure with a post showing an alternative view of the vanquishing.
“I’m going to be sick,” added another, reacting to the compellingly gruesome conclusion in which Silva could be said to have shown commendable fortitude.
Omargadzhiev, who had pledged that his “time has come” beforehand, could be back at the Apex before long.
Boasting a flawless record as a professional, the 28-year-old has now been handed a deal by the UFC – and fellow middleweights are certain to either view the clip as a cautionary tale or a finish to be viewed from behind the sofa.
The former combat sambo world champion has ended ten of his 12 fights prematurely, including eight knockouts.
He suggested he had signed a four-fight deal with the UFC, and his Octagon debut was a devastating way to announce his arrival with White’s juggernaut.
Silva sounded a reassuring note despite the nature of his defeat to his Paris-trained adversary.
“A rough night, but that’s OK,” he told his fans on social media. “Only those who have lived understand. Very grateful for all the love and affection I received in the messages – I love you so much.”
Barcelona fans have called for club legend Xavi to step in after beleaguered boss Ronald Koeman was unceremoniously axed following another away defeat in a dismal season on the road in the wake of Lionel Messi’s shock departure.
A European Cup winner as a player with the club, Koeman had given no indication that he would repeat those heights during a dire start to the campaign that has left the Spanish giants marooned in ninth in La Liga, almost equidistant between the top of the table and the relegation zone.
Koeman, who left his position as Netherlands coach to take over at the Camp Nou in August 2020, had faced a tricky task in overseeing a period of unexpectedly drastic transition courtesy of the departure of talisman and all-time club top scorer Lionel Messi to Paris Saint-Germain as a result of the club’s much-publicized financial troubles.
Despite those struggles, few would have anticipated Barca making such a wretched start this season. Their 1-0 defeat at Rayo Vallecano on Wednesday made for their first sequence of three straight away defeats since 2008, compounded by a Memphis Depay penalty miss in the aftermath of a 2-1 loss at home to arch-rivals and league leaders Real Madrid on Sunday.
BREAKING: Ronald Koeman is out as Barcelona manager following Wednesday's 1-0 LaLiga loss to Rayo Vallecano, their third defeat in their last four league games. pic.twitter.com/BFjzoHuUmJ
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, I wanted him to stay till the next El Clasico but everything has an end
The club confirmed that Koeman had been dismissed in a brief public statement.
“The president of the club, Joan Laporta, informed him of the decision after the defeat against Rayo Vallecano,” it said.
“Ronald Koeman will say goodbye to the squad on Thursday at the [training ground and academy base] Ciutat Esportiva.
– Luis Suarez joins Atletico and wins La Liga – Lionel Messi leaves for PSG as club enter financial meltdown – Lose first two UCL games – Lose El Clasico – 9th in La Liga
“FC Barcelona would like to thank him for his service to the club and wishes him all the best in his professional career.”
In an interview that now looks distinctly ill-advised, Koeman told NOS in September that it was “not good” that Laporta had suggested “that the coach didn’t have all the power”.
“I am open to staying,” he added at the time. “Thanks to me, this club has a future.”
Some fans now want Xavi Hernandez, who made more than 700 appearances for the club between 1998 and 2015 and won the Champions League four times with them, to take over – and several Barcelona fan accounts produced mock-up announcements welcoming the 41-year-old back to the setting for so much of his success during his celebrated career.
While Koeman has embarked on a futile attempt to revive Barca’s fortunes, Xavi has impressed at Qatari club Al-Sadd, leading them to a record 34 consecutive league games unbeaten this week.
Manchester United fans also expressed their envy on social media after watching the Barcelona board take decisive action.
Many United followers want the Old Trafford hierarchy to sack boss Ole Gunnar Solskjaer following their almost unprecedented 5-0 home defeat to Liverpool in the Premier League on Sunday, which was the floundering Premier League club’s third loss as part of a run of four winless league games. “Serious clubs know every second counts,” said one disgruntled supporter.
An apparently functional EU Digital Covid Certificate bearing the name of Adolf Hitler has circulated online this week, before being invalidated. The incident raises questions about the security of the ‘vaccine passport’ system.
A QR code appeared online on Tuesday and, when scanned with several verification apps, revealed a working EU Digital Covid Certificate bearing the name “Adolf Hitler,” born on January 1, 1900. Several versions of the code were then noticed on tech forums, some with the name capitalized, others with a different birthday. But all would have granted the Fuhrer access to any indoor event off-limits to the unvaccinated.
The story was picked up by the Italian media, but it is unknown where the security keys necessary for generating Hitler’s QR code actually came from. Il Post reported that Hitler’s pass had been issued with a key from France, but noted that this information could also have been forged.
The Europe-wide Covid pass system works by pairing a public key (contained in the QR code and visible to anyone scanning the code with an app) with a private key (held by hospitals or other healthcare providers). Venues checking the validity of someone’s Covid pass scan the code and receive a green tick if it matches the private key, or a red cross if not.
As of Wednesday afternoon, the private key used to verify Hitler’s pass was revoked, but a Polish user on one tech forum still claimed to be selling working certificates, as did some posters on the so-called ‘dark web.’
Whether the private key used to validate Hitler’s pass was stolen or leaked remains a mystery. Alternatively a healthcare employee with access to the private key could have generated the fake certificate for the Nazi leader.
Leaked or stolen keys present a serious problem for the EU’s Covid certificate system. Any number of passes can be generated based on a single private key, meaning that revoking one of these keys would invalidate any pass based on it, real or fake. Re-certifying hundreds or even thousands of passes at a time could harm public confidence in the system, which is already unpopular in some countries.
Hitler is not the first high-profile name to get a fake Covid certificate. Earlier this month a French teenager was arrested earlier when he attempted to enter a hospital using the health-pass data of President Emmanuel Macron. The French president’s public data had leaked online, meaning anyone could use his QR code as their own and the code would read as valid. However, it would be immediately obvious to an official checking the code in person that the user was not, in fact, the president.
Republican lawmakers have savaged Attorney General Merrick Garland for doubling down on a memo pitting the federal government against parents criticizing school boards. The GOP accused Garland of waging “political retribution”.
Garland testified before a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, and Republicans on the committee were out for blood. The hearing took place several weeks after Garland authored a memo seemingly directing the Justice Department to sic the FBI and other federal agencies on parents protesting school boards over mask mandates, transgender policies, and the inclusion of ‘Critical Race Theory’ in curricula – according to the conservatives and the parents in question.
Garland has denied targeting parents, claiming that the effort is directed at the threats to school board members, not the First Amendment rights of the parents.
While Garland’s memo doesn’t implicitly mention “parents,” it was issued after the National Association of School Boards (NASB) claimed in a letter to President Joe Biden that the protests of angry parents “could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” and should be handled like “domestic terrorism,” using the Patriot Act.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) accused Garland of “politicizing” the Justice Department and using it as “a tool of political retribution” against the angered parents. No violent incidents were cited in Garland’s memo, and Cruz forced the Attorney General to admit that he knew of no such incidents, and that speaking out to school boards is protected by the First Amendment.
Documents retrieved by parents under the Freedom of Information Act show that NASB President Viola Garcia and CEO Chip Slaven planned their letter over several weeks with the White House, and sent it without the approval of the association’s board of directors, who considered its language “extreme.” The letter has since been disavowed by the NASB, but Garland’s memo has not been rescinded.
Under questioning from Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska), Garland maintained on Wednesday that he acted based on the recommendation of the NASB, but Sasse cut off the AG mid-sentence.
“No, you didn’t receive an anonymous letter,” Sasse interjected. “White House political staff co-wrote it with this organization, which is why the organization has rejected it. You know these facts now to be true, yet you still won’t disavow your memo.”
GARLAND: "We received a letter from the National Association of School Boards—"
SASSE: "No, you didn't receive an anonymous letter. White House political staff co-wrote it… You know these facts now to be true, but you still won't disavow your memo."
Garland insisted that his memo toned down some of the language contained in the NASB’s letter, and told the hearing that “True threats of violence are not protected by the First Amendment…those are the only things we are worried about here. We are not investigating peaceful protests or parent involvement in school board meetings.”
One of the cases cited in the letter was that of Scott Smith, who was arrested at a Loudoun County School Board meeting in Virginia earlier this year. Smith physically threatened someone and resisted arrest, and was taken to the ground by officers. However, Smith’s daughter had been raped in the school’s bathroom by a boy in a skirt. A member of the board told Smith that she didn’t believe him, and it later emerged that the rape did happen, and was covered up by the school, apparently to protect its transgender bathroom policy.
Tom Cotton eviscerates Merrick Garland & reminds us how lucky we are that Garland isn’t on the Supreme Court. pic.twitter.com/w8mMgo2c6y
The Smith case has further inflamed tensions in the affluent Virginia county, where students staged a walkout on Tuesday to protest the cover-up. The case, as well as disputes over mask mandates and the teaching of critical race theory, has become a key issue in Virginia’s gubernatorial election, set to take place next week.
Democratic Candidate Terry McAuliffe has alternated between insisting that critical race theory is not taught in public schools, and claiming that such theory “is as important” as math and English. He has accused his rival, Glenn Youngkin, of trying to “silence the voices of black authors” by suggesting that parents should be made aware that their children are being shown books like ‘Genderqueer’ and ‘Lawn Boy,’ the latter of which contains descriptions of gay sex between children.
Youngkin is a supporter of parents having some say in what their children are taught, while McAuliffe stated at a debate this month that “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” More than six in 10 Virginians say school curricula will be a “major factor” in how they vote next week.
