8 ms·

In the section for 'Schengen Border Checks', under the image of the Russian passport, there is a picture of a scowling Gérard Depardieu[1], which is a thinly ve

In the section for 'Schengen Border Checks', under the image of the Russian passport, there is a picture of a scowling Gérard Depardieu[1], which is a thinly veiled attempt at a display of mirth and disdain in equal parts, by the Directorate General of EU Commission - Migration and Home Affairs. Although, his body of work and extracurricular activities could provide a further source of fodder for ridicule. However, it reveals the general message from EU after this vote i.e. we don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead [2]. [1] https://www.securityresearch-cou.eu/sites/default/files/02.Rinkens.Secure%20safe%20societies_EU%20interoperability_4-3_v1.0.pdf https://www.securityresearch-cou.eu/sites/default/files/02.R... [2] https://www.gemalto.com/govt/coesys/eborder/entry-exit-system https://www.gemalto.com/govt/coesys/eborder/entry-exit-syste...

christudor 7y ago
"We don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead." The EU seems to have done this for at least twenty-five years, the prime example being their stubborn insistence on monetary union despite the mountains of expert opinion saying that monetary union made no sense economically.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  And those experts were pretty much on point. I doubt the EU will survive long with its attitude. I wouldn't mind, since something new is preferable to this.
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  This misses the point. You could also say that monetary union between the US states makes no sense economically. The point is that the people decided to have a political union and to belong to the same country, the USA. Monetary union follows. The aim is to have a federal union in Europe. In a way, going straight to monetary union is to 'force' further political union because they know full well that it requires it in order to work. It's crucial to have the economics work but economics does not control culture and politics, it's the other way round.
  - franch 7y ago
    > The aim is to have a federal union in Europe. In a way, going straight to monetary union is to 'force' further political union because they know full well that it requires it in order to work. Sorry, but I disagree. There is no consensus whatsoever in the EU about a federal Union. There is not even consensus on a budgetary union (as in shared debt, not just having a shared currency) because it will reflect badly on states that currently have stronger economies in the EU: https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-lithuania/merkel-says-no-to-euro-bonds-idUSB4N1E900N https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-lithuania/merkel-say... Actually, to be fair, every time there was a popular referendum even the EU Constitution has been rejected by the population (it only passed later by the parliament): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitution_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitut... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Dutch_European_Constitution_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Dutch_European_Constituti...
    - NotPaidToPost 7y ago
      Ever closer political union has been the aim, publicly stated or not, since the early days of the treaty of Rome. They know and knew that monetary union can only lead to further political union. The main issue, or the benefit, is that it requires all countries to have a good governance. It will force Greece and friends to finally be serious.
    - winter_blue 7y ago
      > every time there was a popular referendum even the EU Constitution has been rejected by the population That it was "rejected by the population" is a dishonest characterization. Referendums in Luxembourg and Spain were successful. Elected representatives in 16 other EU countries voted in favor of the Constitution. Yes, it was rejected by voters France and the Netherlands, and that killed the treaty, because establishing a Constitution requires unanimous support. So, no, it wasn't rejected by "the population" (a term that it was always be inaccurate[1]). It was rejected by a minority. And the treaty being one that requires unanimous approval, failed because of that. This Wikipedia page shows the full picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe#Ratification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitu... [1] Anytime there's a characterization in the form of "the people" (or "the American people") it's dishonest and inaccurate, because the "people" of any large enough group hold diverse-enough opinions that you simply cannot characterize them with a broad brush. (Unless of course, you conduct referendum in which the question is affirmed unanimously by everyone in the group with a 100% quorum. Which gets quickly almost-impossible as the group's size increases.)
deugtniet 7y ago
I don't see the point of disdain, Depardieu is a relatively well known Russian citizen and also a French public figure, so if you want someone from outside of the EU visa agreements, perhaps it's a good example of an individual like that? In addition, there's substantial pressure from member states to secure the border, and make it as efficient as possible. The governments of Italy and Hungary have practically been screaming about border protection issues. It's not only limited to governments, many national and EP parties have publicly expressed the same viewpoint. I also don't like these systems because of privacy concerns. But suggesting that it's disdainful or undemocratic, it is not. The democratic process is being followed. Perhaps you're seeing something that is not there, or you just really dislike the EU institutions for some reason.
- johnnycab 7y ago
  >I don't see the point of disdain, Depardieu is a relatively well known Russian citizen and also a French public figure so if you want someone from outside of the EU visa agreements, perhaps it's a good example of an individual like that? He famously gave up his French passport [1]. The official document features his picture issued via a legitimate Department/Executive agency [2]. If I didn't know any better, that looks like a meme! You are implying that a department which is responsible for implementing the most wide-ranging project and whose sole remit is based around taxonomy of biometrics, has a totally legitimate right to use an image of any person in official documents, in order to promote certain values of it's member states and thereby circumventing it's own laws and directives like Art.17? [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20750593 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20750593 [2] https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/migration-and-home-affairs_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/migration-and-home-aff...
  - deugtniet 7y ago
    Actually, I’m not implying that. What I’m implying is that this department uses images of public figures for them to give good examples of individuals. As said in my previous comment, Depardieu is a well known public figure, and he allows the use of his images in other public places, so his use in government documents is justified. Trump is on there as well. Do you also want to complain about his depiction?
nothis 7y ago
>"Smile, you're in Europe!" This is under a section where they explain how they link your face biometrics into a universal database after taking your fingerprints. Wow.
CzechTech 7y ago
The germans always find a way to control Europe.
_visgean 7y ago
They also use Donald Trump as an example. I suspect this presentation was done mainly to explain the plan to politicians finding the whole topic technical and boring and therefore they tried to entertain them a bit.

christudor 7y ago

"We don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead." The EU seems to have done this for at least twenty-five years, the prime example being their stubborn insistence on monetary union despite the mountains of expert opinion saying that monetary union made no sense economically.

raxxorrax 7y ago
And those experts were pretty much on point. I doubt the EU will survive long with its attitude. I wouldn't mind, since something new is preferable to this.
NotPaidToPost 7y ago
This misses the point. You could also say that monetary union between the US states makes no sense economically. The point is that the people decided to have a political union and to belong to the same country, the USA. Monetary union follows. The aim is to have a federal union in Europe. In a way, going straight to monetary union is to 'force' further political union because they know full well that it requires it in order to work. It's crucial to have the economics work but economics does not control culture and politics, it's the other way round.
- franch 7y ago
  > The aim is to have a federal union in Europe. In a way, going straight to monetary union is to 'force' further political union because they know full well that it requires it in order to work. Sorry, but I disagree. There is no consensus whatsoever in the EU about a federal Union. There is not even consensus on a budgetary union (as in shared debt, not just having a shared currency) because it will reflect badly on states that currently have stronger economies in the EU: https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-lithuania/merkel-says-no-to-euro-bonds-idUSB4N1E900N https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-lithuania/merkel-say... Actually, to be fair, every time there was a popular referendum even the EU Constitution has been rejected by the population (it only passed later by the parliament): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitution_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitut... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Dutch_European_Constitution_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Dutch_European_Constituti...
  - NotPaidToPost 7y ago
    Ever closer political union has been the aim, publicly stated or not, since the early days of the treaty of Rome. They know and knew that monetary union can only lead to further political union. The main issue, or the benefit, is that it requires all countries to have a good governance. It will force Greece and friends to finally be serious.
  - winter_blue 7y ago
    > every time there was a popular referendum even the EU Constitution has been rejected by the population That it was "rejected by the population" is a dishonest characterization. Referendums in Luxembourg and Spain were successful. Elected representatives in 16 other EU countries voted in favor of the Constitution. Yes, it was rejected by voters France and the Netherlands, and that killed the treaty, because establishing a Constitution requires unanimous support. So, no, it wasn't rejected by "the population" (a term that it was always be inaccurate[1]). It was rejected by a minority. And the treaty being one that requires unanimous approval, failed because of that. This Wikipedia page shows the full picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe#Ratification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitu... [1] Anytime there's a characterization in the form of "the people" (or "the American people") it's dishonest and inaccurate, because the "people" of any large enough group hold diverse-enough opinions that you simply cannot characterize them with a broad brush. (Unless of course, you conduct referendum in which the question is affirmed unanimously by everyone in the group with a 100% quorum. Which gets quickly almost-impossible as the group's size increases.)

deugtniet 7y ago

I don't see the point of disdain, Depardieu is a relatively well known Russian citizen and also a French public figure, so if you want someone from outside of the EU visa agreements, perhaps it's a good example of an individual like that? In addition, there's substantial pressure from member states to secure the border, and make it as efficient as possible. The governments of Italy and Hungary have practically been screaming about border protection issues. It's not only limited to governments, many national and EP parties have publicly expressed the same viewpoint. I also don't like these systems because of privacy concerns. But suggesting that it's disdainful or undemocratic, it is not. The democratic process is being followed. Perhaps you're seeing something that is not there, or you just really dislike the EU institutions for some reason.

johnnycab 7y ago
>I don't see the point of disdain, Depardieu is a relatively well known Russian citizen and also a French public figure so if you want someone from outside of the EU visa agreements, perhaps it's a good example of an individual like that? He famously gave up his French passport [1]. The official document features his picture issued via a legitimate Department/Executive agency [2]. If I didn't know any better, that looks like a meme! You are implying that a department which is responsible for implementing the most wide-ranging project and whose sole remit is based around taxonomy of biometrics, has a totally legitimate right to use an image of any person in official documents, in order to promote certain values of it's member states and thereby circumventing it's own laws and directives like Art.17? [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20750593 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20750593 [2] https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/migration-and-home-affairs_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/migration-and-home-aff...
- deugtniet 7y ago
  Actually, I’m not implying that. What I’m implying is that this department uses images of public figures for them to give good examples of individuals. As said in my previous comment, Depardieu is a well known public figure, and he allows the use of his images in other public places, so his use in government documents is justified. Trump is on there as well. Do you also want to complain about his depiction?

nothis 7y ago

>"Smile, you're in Europe!" This is under a section where they explain how they link your face biometrics into a universal database after taking your fingerprints. Wow.

CzechTech 7y ago

The germans always find a way to control Europe.

_visgean 7y ago

They also use Donald Trump as an example. I suspect this presentation was done mainly to explain the plan to politicians finding the whole topic technical and boring and therefore they tried to entertain them a bit.