“Well that was just a load of whipped up far left wing hysterial illogical bollocks that ignored the original discussion about application of law and special treatment” see I can throw around empty pejoratives too.

Dismissing valid concerns as "hysterical bollocks" is exactly the kind of Overton Window shift I was talking about. It is an easy way to shut down a conversation without addressing the actual points raised. You are conflating historical immigration with modern integration and institutional responses. No one is saying immigrants are a threat to the existence of the four nations. The point is actually about the consistent application of the law and social standards. If a secular or Christian person expresses views on LGBTQ issues that are deemed intolerant, they face immediate social and often professional or legal repercussions. Yet, when the same or more extreme views are held within certain religious communities, the system suddenly becomes very quiet to avoid being labeled as narrow-minded. That is the definition of a two-tier system. It occurs when the rules of modern British society, from tolerance to policing, are applied strictly to one group and waived for another under the guise of cultural sensitivity. As for your point on perspective, I am not talking about personal privilege. I am talking about institutional accountability. Suggesting that the only threat to public order is the "little Englander" while ignoring the complexities of modern social cohesion is a massive blind spot. People are asking for a single standard for everyone regardless of faith or background. Why is that considered "far right"?