Whats amused you (in the news) today ?

Me too.  Plus the DEC Afghanistan appeal.

Well, the only criminals are the people smugglers.

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/FOUR-S25-CASES-Judgment-.pdf

And, yes, perhaps it would make a lot more sense to provide legitimate routes and remove their trade - as you say, strong parallels with drugs.

I think the illegal immigrants themselves might also be considered criminal, unless the meaning of illegal has changed since I was at school.  

"Politicised lie"?  Where do politics come into it?  This was a Crown Court judgement. 

My reading of the judgement is that four boat steerers were found guilty of assisting illegal immigration, pure and simple.  So the act of steering people without leave to stay here is illegal. 

Even the defendants themselves agreed...

AND the individuals they were driving were also acting illegally...

73. Thus, the Home Office issued a number of the official documents, headed “Notice of Liability to Detention” which stated that the person concerned had entered the United Kingdom illegally because he did not have documentation or any other evidence of a right to enter. The document in Bani’s case said:- “This notice is given to you because there is reasonable suspicion that you may be liable to removal or deportation from the United Kingdom. Statement of Specific Reasons You are specifically considered an illegal entrant to the UK as you were encountered in a private vehicle namely a RHIB which had recently arrived in the UK from France. You could not produce any travel document or provide any evidence of your lawful basis to be in the UK and have therefore entered the UK in breach of S.3(1)(a) of the Immigration Act 1971-Illegal Entrant.”

And then it all got quashed on a technicality.

EDIT:  Apparently it's illegal unless your intention is to be intercepted by a UK Border Patrol boat, in which case it suddenly isn't illegal any more.   

I despair.  

But not that of the law. Which is rather more relevant than the manipulated opinion of a bunch of Daily-Mail-Believers.

It's very simple:
Somebody is in this country legally, no matter how they reached it, while they apply for asylum.
If/when their application is refused, then they are no longer here legally, and can be removed from the country - but the only country that has to accept them is their home country, and they cannot be returned there if it is unsafe.
There is no legal obligation for anybody to apply to the first safe country they arrive in.

This is all enshrined in UN treaties that the UK has been a signatory to since the 1950s, and which all civilised countries in the world are signatory to.

Perhaps we ( the World ) need an island somewhere where the stateless can be placed.

if someone is here illegally and has no right to stay, but can't be sent back to their "home" country they could all be put together and provided with the means to make a basic living.

again I would repeat that Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention states that refugees cannot be penalised for entering the country illegally to claim asylum if they are “coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened” provided they “present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence”. if they claimed asylum in Greece and Germany and were rejected then they have not "come directly". if the law does not permit us to refuse them asylum then the law is wrong.

I apply the same to Shamina Begum, I agree she has the right to appeal against effectively being made stateless, however she should not be allowed back to the UK to make that appeal as we would not be allowed to remove her if her appeal fails.

My view is simple, if someone is refused asylum for good reasons eg it can be shown they are Economic Migrants rather than true Asylum seekers it MUST be made possible to remove them from the UK otherwise we have uncontrolled immigration. ( If the law doesn't allow it the law needs to be changed).
I would say my views on people committing criminal offenses differs from the Government, I believe adults who come here and commit crimes such as major drug dealing , Rape, Murder etc should be deported immediately on completion of their sentence. however someone who comes as a child (under 16) and is then found guilty 20 or more years later should be allowed to stay. Asylum seekers committing and major offence eg the above plus offences of violence etc should also lose the right to asylum and be removed from the UK on completion of the sentence.