4 ms·

Thomas de Maizière wants that. The guy says unconstitutional shit like this every other week. It'll be shot down by our supreme court for sure, if it's even ta

by Sylos 9y ago

Thomas de Maizière wants that. The guy says unconstitutional shit like this every other week. It'll be shot down by our supreme court for sure, if it's even taken into consideration in the first place.

ekianjo 9y ago
Its like this guy never heard of the DDR and the Stazi.
- CamperBob2 9y ago
  I'm sure he's heard of them. The question is, have the voters who elected him?
  - Sylos 9y ago
    He's not directly elected. Merkel appointed him.
- ptaipale 9y ago
  It's written Stasi (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit). That z you probably get from association with Nazis.
waibelp 9y ago
Nothing to add.
krylon 9y ago
On the one hand, you are right. On the other hand, it is still troubling. Also, I get the impression that the supreme court is tired of basically having to make policy by invalidating unconstitutional laws. If there were serious consequences for politicians and members of parliament for creating unconstitutional laws, maybe they would think twice before doing that. But of course, the people who would have to put such sanctions in place are the very people who would be affected by them, so that is not going to happen. :(
- Sylos 9y ago
  I'm not happy either with this surveillance freak in a position with publicity. No matter how sure I am that his political attempts will fail again and again, with him repeating this bullshit over and over people are actually starting to believe things like that we need surveillance cameras to stop terrorism, even though surveillance cameras really can do fuckall about a guy hiding a bomb under his jacket and then blowing himself up or someone driving a van into a group of people. Not to mention that this guy is actively helping out terrorists with that. He's spreading terror. He's making citizens here worry quite a bit, even though there's no real reason to be worried. You're a hundred times more likely to die of all kinds of things every day. There is no point being worried about terrorists.

by Sylos 9y ago

ekianjo 9y ago

Its like this guy never heard of the DDR and the Stazi.

CamperBob2 9y ago
I'm sure he's heard of them. The question is, have the voters who elected him?
- Sylos 9y ago
  He's not directly elected. Merkel appointed him.
ptaipale 9y ago
It's written Stasi (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit). That z you probably get from association with Nazis.

waibelp 9y ago

Nothing to add.

krylon 9y ago

On the one hand, you are right. On the other hand, it is still troubling. Also, I get the impression that the supreme court is tired of basically having to make policy by invalidating unconstitutional laws. If there were serious consequences for politicians and members of parliament for creating unconstitutional laws, maybe they would think twice before doing that. But of course, the people who would have to put such sanctions in place are the very people who would be affected by them, so that is not going to happen. :(

Sylos 9y ago
I'm not happy either with this surveillance freak in a position with publicity. No matter how sure I am that his political attempts will fail again and again, with him repeating this bullshit over and over people are actually starting to believe things like that we need surveillance cameras to stop terrorism, even though surveillance cameras really can do fuckall about a guy hiding a bomb under his jacket and then blowing himself up or someone driving a van into a group of people. Not to mention that this guy is actively helping out terrorists with that. He's spreading terror. He's making citizens here worry quite a bit, even though there's no real reason to be worried. You're a hundred times more likely to die of all kinds of things every day. There is no point being worried about terrorists.