Was/is the protesting at East Wall Racist?

Vetting does not refer exclusively to criminal background checks, what a load of BS. 'To vet' is a commonly used verb which means to examine or background check something/someone to make sure they are suitable for a given subject. People presented at (air)ports in this country with no identification cannot be vetted in any way. How can you check anything about someone without any proof of identity?

As for the fingerprinting - these people in East wall are not "on the system" - if they were, they would be returned to the EU member state that first put them in the system, as per the Dublin III regulations

So once again, these people being kept in East Wall are undocumented and unvetted.

not sure why that's relevant - the poster said women and children are afraid to walk around certain parts of london because of foreigners - i'd love to know which parts he means because i've lived here on and off for years and have never heard of these areas

but yes the economic and cultural powerhouse with possibly the best public transport in the world that is london surely isn't the way to do things

Fantastic to see the push back of local communities suffering the consequences of dumping unvetted welfare tourists into their areas. What’s even better is the moral lecturing of the poisonous far left and their NGO Government cronies whom are heavily reliant on these peoples votes come next election. Thinking of that ginger whinger Gannon and Mary fake Lou McDonald and that ilk. Talk about trying to stop the tide lol- people have seen enough and no amount of “racist” label dog whistles will convince them otherwise- have all the “diversity” days and moralising rubbish you want yo try ram down their necks- they don’t want it

Did he give a clear statistical link to that statement? If not it’s complete horse shite. Course he needs to keep on script with his paymasters

You were mocking Ben Shapiro only a few days ago, yet you're starting to sound like those memes that mocked him.

😂

Exactly.

This is the problem and not the employment rate or race. Infrastructure!!!!!

So stop screaming racism at people with valid concerns over the sustainability of such population increases.

Scream it at the racists like Philip Dwyer.

I just had a thought, isn't there supposed to be a sign publicly visible i.e. on a main street so people can see proposed planning changes before permission is granted. If that wasn't the case then is the planning permission legal? Looking at Citizens Advice site, it says that before applying for planning permission there must be public notice given.

[quote] Before applying for planning permission you must give public notice of your proposals. You do this by:

• Putting a notice in a local newspaper (your local authority will have a list), and
• Putting up a site notice that can be clearly seen and read

You will find details of information that must be contained in the notices in the planning application form. Your planning application must be received by the local authority within 2 weeks of the notice appearing in the local newspaper and the site notice going up.

Note: The site notice must remain in place for at least 5 weeks from the date of receipt of the planning application. (Note, nine days over Christmas, from 24 December to 1 January, are not taken into account when calculating the 5-week period).[/quote]

So was adequate public notice given of the change of use? There should at the very least be a copy of the notice in the local newspaper and perhaps a photo of the site notice and a statement of where it was put.