Law suit against German Labor Ministry BMAS for blocking on Twitter

This is a condensed excerpt from my law suit against the German Labor Ministry's blocking on Twitter.

I hereby lodge a complaint against the

Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs represented by Minister Hubertus Heil, Wilhelmstraße 49, 10117 Berlin (hereinafter BMAS)

for blocking on Twitter and thereby committing a

Violation of Article 5 (1) sentence 1 GG as well as in particular Article 3 (1) and (3) GG and in extension §§ 1 (1), 5 (1) and 7 (1) IFG.

Reason

I. In 2017 or 2018, the Twitter account @ErebusSagace was blocked by the neo-liberal BMAS. As a user of this social network account, I was thus deprived of my constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression as well as freedom of information pursuant to Art. 5 (1) sentence 1 GG and in particular Art. 3 (1) and (3) GG.

In the paper of the German Bundestag "Access to public relations of the police in social media Twitter", © 2018 German Bundestag WD 3 - 3000 - 044/18 it says:

2. Blocking users

If the police blocks specific posts or users on their short message account, this fundamentally and depending on the case design interferes with the following basic rights:

• The freedom of expression of the user, insofar as he can no longer comment on contributions from the police (Article 5 (1) sentence 1 GG);
• freedom of information of the user insofar as he can no longer view the contributions of the police or only under difficult conditions (Article 5 (1) sentence 1 GG);
• the right to equal participation in public services and facilities (Article 5 (1) sentence 1 GG, Article 3 (1) GG)

Without doubt this also applies to federal ministries. These are obviously of the opinion that Hartz IV recipients are dispensable social accessories. In a fax dated Jan. 14, 2019 (see attachment) I asked the neoliberal Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs for information about the reasons for blocking on Twitter and the official guidelines of the Federal Government for blockages on social networks in general. I set the deadline February 8, 2019, after several pertinent communications, as can be seen from the fax, remained unanswered in a typically German way. This request, too, remained unanswered in well-known German fashion.

In any case, the BMAS received an e-mail notification on the blog post "German Labor Minister Nahles, reign in your criminals" June 1, 2017. This post dealt with the criminal civil servant Manfred Jäger (coercion) and the completely retarded criminal civil servant and useful idiot Jürgen Sonneck (slander), formerly Jobcenter Munich and operating under the wrong name 'C. Paucher'. This was covered up by Munich police and the Munich Court despite glaring circumstantial evidence.
...

For the sake of completeness and in support of the facts presented here, the article "GERMANY IS WORLD CHAMPION! WHEN BLOCKING TWITTER ACCOUNTS" deals with a shocking but not surprising scenario according to which Germany is even ahead of Turkey in the ranking of opinion oppressors.
...

V. Last but not least, the plaintiff would like to point to the country with a First Amendment, which assures a much broader right to free speech than Germany's Article 5 GG. There, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled on May 23, 2018 in the case Knight First Amendment Institute v. United States. Trump, No. 1: 17-cv-05205 (S.D.N.Y.):

“This case requires us to consider whether a public official may, consistent with the First Amendment, “block” a person from his Twitter account in response to the political views that person has expressed, and whether the analysis differs because that public official is the President of the United States. The answer to both questions is no.”

US lawyer Eugene Volokh's article "Blocking Twitter Users from @RealDonald Trump Violates First Amendment" explains the judge's reasoning in particular in the paragraphs 1 and 3:

[1.] The virtual space provided by Twitter for replying to the President's Tweets is a "designated public forum" -- a space controlled (even if not owned) by the government that is generally open for public speech to fellow members of the public, and in which the First Amendment forbids viewpoint discrimination. The Tweets themselves aren't a forum, because they are the President's own speech; but the space for public replies is a forum. The court's concern is that replies are a valuable means for the repliers to speak to fellow members of the public. The court recognizes that there's no right to speak to the President in a way that the President is obliged to read; the President remains free, for instance, to use Twitter's "mute" function, which would keep him from seeing the user's replies when he reviews his own feed.

[3.] Though blocked users remain free to read the President's Tweets, and can even comment on them through various workarounds (such as by creating new accounts), the various workarounds "require [the individual plaintiffs] to take more steps than non-blocked, signed-in users to view the President's tweets," which "delay[s] their ability to respond to @realDonaldTrump tweets." This is not a vast burden, the court concluded, but "the First Amendment recognizes, and protects against, even de minimis harms."

@RegSprecher , "Is the German ministries' rampant blocking on Social Networks based on scientific studies?"

It says there "... we find that the use of SNSs (i.e., Facebook and Twitter) has a direct, negative relationship to deliberation in many offline settings. Some uses of these platforms are associated with having a lower, perceived opinion agreement with social ties. ...

— Habermasian Legitimizer (@ErebusSagace) February 6, 2019

IOW, is the German gov's blocking to be understood as an enticement to foster creative & discursive family life in the safe space of four walls? A liberation from the shackles of the binary habitat?

— Habermasian Legitimizer (@ErebusSagace) February 6, 2019

After all, GERMANY IS WORLD CHAMPION! IN BLOCKING TWITTER ACCOUNTS (in German). Ze Germans are ahead of Turkey!

Blocked Twitter accounts by country

Chancellor Merkel, allow me to introduce to you Nazi-style informer and former Jobcenter co-CEO Jurgen Sonneck alias C. Paucher

German Chancellery
Willy-Brandt-Strasse 1
10557 Berlin

May 16, 2018

Dear Chancellor Merkel,

Allow me to first congratulate you to your new term as Chancellor. Third time's a charm, they say. Four times must be considered auspicious. I would venture to call it devine.

Having said that, I am at pains to relate an unfortunate event. Unfortunate, because if memory serves me right, German public employees are the epitome of righteousness and integrity. They literally breathe devotion and commitment to their job. I think the German word is 'Pflichterfüllung'.

Sadly, for one of your public employees at a Jobcenter that mantra got lost. He went a little astray and took the career path of being the Useful Idiot of a public authority to an all new level. Some would call it dope-ass, shady-ass dealings with police under cover of the night.

May I take the liberty and introduce to you the spritely Jurgen Sonneck from the capital of the province of Bavaria, Munich. Valiant Jurgen had embarked on a career trajectory few could dream of. He was privileged to fill the esteemed and prestigious position of deputy CEO of the Jobcenter in Munich.

J. Sonneck alias C. Paucher
(vielleicht auch Big Swinging Dick?) Jürgen Sonneck, alias C. Paucher, prefers
den anonymity.
In particular on the Internet.
Hier ist er links zu sehen.

For reasons unbeknownst to me, young and balding Jurgen Sonneck took a turn to the weird side that would raise some eyebrows in circles devoted to integrity. It is certainly completely at odds of what one would expect from a public employee charged with providing social services.

On May 7, 2015 this rotten public employee and Useful Idiot Jurgen Sonneck sent an email to Munich police at 07:57:40 PM (see Police report BY 8644-001083-15/3, Kriminalfachdezernat 4) USING A FALSE NAME! Jurgen Sonneck alias C. Paucher had planned that heinous attack on us six months ahead, which goes to show what a screwed up and primitive character he is. Creepy Jurgen Sonneck did consider this blog post to be hate speech (see attachment)

Was he hungry for devious revenge, perhaps a sexual slave to the unwed then CEO of the Jobcenter Munich, Martina Musati (confer Leopold Ritter von Sacher-Masoch, Otto Weininger in 'Sex and Character' and Pierre Bourdieu in 'Masculine Domination'), who left shortly after? In any case, he could bank on the secrecy of Munich police and Kangaroo courts to cover his tracks, or so he thought.

A Nazi-style secret informer operating under a false name amongst your public employees? Was due diligence skipped on the Useful Idiot Jurgen Sonneck? Are public employees not vetted in Germany? Has his mental sanity been tested, or is your German Labor Ministry BMAS running amok? Despite various calls on the BMAS and its hideously fat labor minister in 2017, it remained steadfastly in tried and tested German tradition quiet (1).

In the course of this seedy character's attack all our IT equipment including router was confiscated. My smartphone was confiscated although there was NO COURT ORDER for that. Bloggers in your country are fair game apparently.

My Tibetan daughter was supposed to be body-searched and her smartphone to be confiscated as well. Fortunately, she had already left for school.

Her MacBook was returned in a deliberately damaged condition by the Kangaroo Court Munich. As it was of no use anymore, I sent it to your Labour Ministry in Berlin in January 2017. No response from the abominably obese then labor minister Nahles.

I had informed your Labor Ministry and the chief of Munich police about the damning evidence that everything pointed to Jurgen Sonneck. No word, everyone stayed mum and quiet. Instead, in a clandestine effort Jurgen  Sonneck was transferred to the Munich Department of Education and Sport. With all due respect, this must be an aberration.

I think we both agree, there can be no place, absolutely no place,  in public service paid by taxpayers money for a nefarious character like Jurgen Sonneck. It would send all the wrong signals.

Decency and integrity would suggest that my daughter and I receive compensation.

Lastly, dear Chancellor, based on our experience with that decrepit "social service outfit" Jobcenter Munich I would deem a thorough clean-up of this Augias Stable of utmost urgency. The criminal practices of some staff reek to high heaven. Neoliberal economic policy produces strange and disconcerting practices and breeds some of the most despicable characters of which Jurgen Sonneck certainly takes the cake.

I would be remiss not to note a decidedly doubtful sincerety of your country's intention to integrate migrants. Perhaps I am just biased.

Allow me to conclude by thanking you for your time and attention. It has been a privilege.

Sincerely,


____________
(1) That seems to be a general policy in ministerial circles as I did not get a single response when asking for email addresses of ministries. Then again, communicating was never a strong suit of these Germans.

Jurgen Sonneck alias C. Paucher considered this to be hate speech.

Oh, for ze Germans ze Disclaimer wiz regard to ze swastika.

German Labor Ministry, please the name of the frigtard public employee that contacted police using a false name! Presto!

Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (BMAS)
Wilhelmstraße 49 (vormals Sitz des Reichsministeriums für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda unter Führung von Joseph Goebbels)
10117 Berlin

Aug. 20, 2017

Case 3 (of 3 - all brought on by German labor agencies infringing my right to free speech)

G'day Labor Minister Nahles,

Your weeks are winding down being the minister of what gets an economy based on neoliberal standards rolling. Cheap labor that is, bedded in a government-guaranteed and accepted level of unemployment.

This might be just the perfect time to make good on a principle so dear to a liberal - and I mean that in the purest and unadulterated of terms, i.e. not politically tainted - state. Or, as John Stuart Mill phrased it in 'On Liberty':

"The object of this Essay  email is to assert one very simple principle, as entitled to govern absolutely the dealings of society with the individual in the way of compulsion and control, whether the means used be physical force in the form of legal penalties, or the moral coercion of public opinion. That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."

I am sure this great thinker did not envision self-protection of a community to entail ratfucking by a public employee in a Cartmanesque style using a false name when infringing free speech. Alas, you and your ministry's domain seem to have a different view and etiquette.

So with this "only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community" in mind, I suggest that you get me the name of that individual public employee of the - with 99,9999% certainty - Jobcenter Munich that contacted Munich police on May 7, 2015 using a false name.

It is very easily done. Call the following persons and press for the answer:

• Martina Musati, presently with the labor agency in Stuttgart and till May/June 2015 head of the Jobcenter Munich,
• Anette Farrenkopf, Jobcenter Munich and
• Sabine Nowack, Jobcenter Munich-Pasing.

Here is again the IP address lookup of that wang ba dan.

I will not stop until I have the name of that frigtard!

It goes without saying that I expect a full replacement of my daughter's confiscated MacBook Pro that was returned by the Munich court in a damaged state and has been sent to your ministry in January 2017.

Thank you,

German Ministry of Justice, I can not help but agree with Turkish President Erdogan and his Foreign Minister Cavusoglu in their assessment of German methods that they "resemble those of the Nazi era."

Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz
c/o Dr. K. Franz
11015 Berlin

cc "Lawyer" Aglaia Muth, Munich (by Email)
cc via Twitter to Mr Uniyal (Gatestone Institute)

AZ: RB1 - AR (2016) - RB 113/2016

March 9, 2017

Dear Undersecretary Dr. Franz,

With your permission I choose to answer in English as the Gatestone Institute fortuitously published a pertinent article titled "Germany's Jihad on Freedom of Speech" and penned by the Indian gentleman Mr Uniyal on the subject of free speech in Germany, or rather the increasing lack of it (1). Saliently, the article touches the heavy-handed actions of German authorities when Chancellor Merkel is mocked. An experience I can confirm firsthand.

Thank you for your short reply to my letter dated Feb. 18, 2017 with regard to infringement of free speech, the subject having been a picture of chancellor Merkel clad in a Nazi uniform with swastika on the 2012 occasion of the vicious and atrocious attack of EU Financial Forces of Mass Destruction under the Führership of Germany reported and displayed in major news outlets all over the world. A letter, in which I particularly took issue about how my complaints about my court appointed crooked "defense lawyer" Ms Aglaia Muth from Munich were brushed off by two arbitration boards in Munich and Berlin.

In your letter you reaffirmed the decisions of those arbitration boards and I quote your letter here:

Dear Mr ...,

Thank you for your letter to Mr Heiko Maas, Federal Minister of Justice and Consumer Protection, in which you informed him that the Office of the Federal Prosecutor had referred you to the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection, because this had legal oversight on the arbitration body of the lawyer's office. You describe a legal issue in which you were represented by a Munich attorney. Mr. Federal Minister of Justice and Consumer Protection has asked me to answer you.

The Supervision of the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection extends as a pure legal oversight to the fact that the conciliation agency complies in its -  independent of the content and not subjected to a review - activity with the legal requirements of § 191f of the Federal Law on Public Prosecution. I can not infer from your letter any indications for an unlawful activity of the arbitration body which does not comply with legal requirements. I therefore ask for your understanding that I will not continue to work on the matter you have described. (edited Google translate)

Your assessment is puzzling in that I had described in detail my crooked "lawyer's" total and complete disinterest to defend me in any form whatsoever. Furthermore, I clearly indicated how this cunning lawyer colluded with the court and even refused to disclose the complaint letter sent to Munich police by Mr Manfred Jäger, a rather primitive bully and blackmailer, and presently head of the federal labor agency Ingolstadt. In plain terms, "lawyer" Muth is a criminal, covered by the 'Arbitration Board of Lawyers' in Berlin. Taking money without providing a service is fraud! In that sense, the 'Arbitration Board of Lawyers' in Berlin is condoning fraud!

Firstly, this constitutes a clear breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights of which Germany is a signatory and secondly, interesting to see how a head of a local government agency feels compelled to question the legality of a picture of Merkel posted by a blogger when he obviously had no such reservations about like pictures in German news outlets as shown below.














Strong objections though from bully Jäger (his 19-page letter to police still held back by the rotten Munich Court and crooked and conniving "lawyer" Muth and, of course, the blackmailer himself!) against this picture to the right below.

Merkel - persona non grata

I am even more surprised that you did not comment on my "Report to EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS on relentless infringements of free speech by German Jobcenter in collusion with Munich Court" sent to the ECHR in Strasbourg in Oct. 2016. A report, in which I describe the concerted efforts of law enforcement agencies, government agencies and conniving lawyer(s) to quell free speech and confiscate all our IT equipment!

In addition, you gave the impression of being unconcerned about concerted actions against me by way of financial destruction of a blogger with intended subsequent imprisonment due to forced default!

As I mentioned above, the Gatestone Institute published an article on March 6, 2017 under the headline "Germany's Jihad on Freedom of Speech" by Vijeta Uniyal.

It starts off with the following statement:

In Merkel's Germany, you are allowed to walk free after setting fire to a synagogue, but not for mocking the Chancellor's "sacred" refugee policy.

The article paints a picture that is all too familiar to me in that the Munich Kangaroo Court - steadfastly refusing a retrial of the sham court hearing -, government agencies and Munich police are in bed together to shut me down as a blogger and get me finally imprisoned by financial attrition. Even by breaking EU law!

Picture: Merkel behind bars.

The Carnival parade float from Bad Bergzabern, Germany, that triggered an investigation by the police and State Attorney, showing Chancellor Angela Merkel behind prison bars, with the caption: "This is how traitors end up." (Image source: SWF video screenshot)

. . . . . . . .

Criticizing Germany's notorious Jobcenters as criminal agencies for the provision of cheap labor and poverty and Germany's heinous actions against Greece has to be cracked down upon with all force.

If memory serves me right, your Ministry has harnessed the services of a questionable foundation, whose head has had Stasi connections and which is funded among others by the German Ministry for Family Affairs, to quell free speech, or "hate speech" as the trope goes. As a father I feel a tad irritated.

I can not help but agree with Turkish President Erdogan and his Foreign Minister Cavusoglu when the latter recently assessed Germany as "a totally repressive system" and "All practices resemble those of the Nazi era." Theodor Adorno was so right in his warning back then.

I might add that these commenters here do not see the 'Arbitration Board of Lawyers' in Berlin, which is under the supervision of your Ministry, in a good and trustworthy light. I can only second their statements based on my own experience in two instances. It is a front organization and a sham.

As I already indicated, I shall send another letter as soon as I get the scandalous verdict in writing of the mendacious judge Bassler from the LG Munich Kangaroo Court in the latest case against me - filed by a person of the Jobcenter Munich under a FALSE name - infringing yet again my right to free speech and subsequently followed up by confiscation of my smartphone WITHOUT court approval and all IT equipment! Since Feb. 15, 2017 I refer to the Bavarian judiciary only under the moniker 'Bavarian Roland Freisler Courts'. I am afraid, there is no free speech in Germany!

Sincerely,
______________
(1) The second reason for writing in the English language is your country's propensity to request deletion of content that is not liked from the internet. I strongly believe in the First Amendment.

German Labor Minister Nahles, you are condoning a racket against free speech. Come clean!

Labor Minister Nahles,

I sent you a letter on January 31, 2017 which you left unanswered in your trademark manner.

Make sure the criminal and fascistoid activities of employees and authorities (Jobcenter and Labor Agency), both under your ministerial portfolio, end! Freedom of expression also applies to Hartz 4 recipients, or does one need to show a certain net worth to be granted that privilege in Germany?

I demand:

• that you finally make sure I get the 19 fucking pages, sent to the Munich police in 2012 by the blackmailer and head of the Ingolstadt Agency for Employment Manfred Jäger. These are still withheld by the Munich prosecutor Weinzierl in breach of Article 6 ECHR for a reason. Among these 19 pages is without any doubt a page with hints/remarks on how I can be rendered mute! The Bavarian courts, Manfred Jäger, and my former court appointed "attorney" Aglaia Muth were involved in a plot to shut me up as a blogger.
• you make sure I get the name of the sneaky asshole of the Social-Fascist Jobcenter Munich, who filed a criminal complaint by email using a FALSE name on May 7, 2015 and thus interfered with my right of freedom of expression. There is striking evidence for this assumption.
• you make sure I am not being blackmailed again to delete a blog post or face a fine to the amount of € 10,000 by Jobcenter staff Martina Musati or Manfred Jäger of the German Labor Agency. The USA has a RICO Act (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) and German government agencies under your supervision engage in just that to infringe on free speech. Unfortunately, the Banana Republic Germany does not have an anti-SLAPP statute like the USA. Small wonder with a clothes hanger as a Minister of Justice who rather prefers the services of a so-called foundation, presided by an ex-Stasi member, to act against free speech on the internet. 
• full damages for the seized Macbook Pro of my daughter which was returned damaged and which we have sent to your Ministry in January as is was useless. 

Minister Nahles, aesthetics is a gift, but refusing to respond to any communication is plain ridiculous and infantile. I have enormous stamina and insist on my right to free speech on the internet. I am appalled by mendacious judges of the Munich Kangaroo Court and cunning Bavarian prosecutors who both consistently and knowingly contravene decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in order to shut down a blogger.

In case you wonder if European law also applies to Germany, you might be interested in reading Prof. Dr. Alexander Proelss WS 2013/2014 'STAATSRECHT III PART 2: POLITICAL LAW AND EXTERNAL LAW III. - 1. The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and German law.

I do entertain a certain hope you might break your awkward silence because I am not going to let up.

Considered hate speech in Germany or fuck free speech

Criminal complaint against Andrea Nahles (Federal Minister for Labour and Social Affairs and writer manqué) for aiding and abetting criminal conduct.

To be presented with the ECHR in Strasbourg


Prosecutor Berlin
10548 Berlin

Oct. 2, 2016

C R I M I N A L     C O M P L A I N T

Accused: Mrs Andrea Maria Nahles (Federal Minister for Labour and Social Affairs and writer manqué)

Address: Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS), Wilhelmstrasse 49 (formerly the seat of the Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda headed by Joseph Goebbels), 10117 Berlin.

Offense:

• § 258 STGB obstruction of justice in connection with
• Infringement of Article 5 Basic Law
• Infringement of § 147 StPO right to inspect records, and in violation of
• Art. 6 (3) of the Convention (right to inspect files)

When and where:  2016 in Berlin, Germany

Justification:

In a letter of August 13, 2012 (Appendix 1) the then Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Employment Agency (BA) Munich, Mr. Manfred Jäger (presently head of the BA in Ingolstadt), refers to a cease and desist letter to me for, as he put it, a defamatory post on the Internet. The C&D letter threatened with a fine of € 10,000.00 (ten thousand) in the event of non-compliance!

Even the Munich Prosecutor quickly recognized this as a classic case of the Dunning-Kruger effect of Manfred Jäger. Instead, what displeased the Munich Prosecutor was the 'Merkel Nazi' image (on the occasion of the German austerity war against Greece in 2012) in a blog post of mine.

I lost in all instances, ably "defended" by my court-appointed "attorney" crooked Ms Aglaia Muth from Munich, who excelled in being non-committal throughout and persistently quiet. I was denied access of files by all involved: judges, prosecutor and my crooked "attorney" Aglaia Muth! A request by my daughter was brushed off by the bald prosecutor Peter Preuss in typical unsophisticated Bavarian fashion.

The whole trial was - as is obvious in hindsight - rigged from the start. Interestingly, a request for reinstatement of early August 2016 has not yet been answered. A blogger must be brought to silence by all means!

After an intensive search on the Internet, I finally discovered the decisions of the ECHR in the cases 'Foucher v. France', 'The Fortum Corporation v. Finland' and 'SUOMINEN v. FINLAND'.  Under Article 6 (3) of the Convention any person who is charged with a criminal offence has the right to access evidence in their case-files.

Only after I referred to these cases, the court in Munich finally relented after more than three years of dodging!

In May 2016 I was given access to the case file which mysteriously did not include the whole correspondence of Mr Jäger. As you can read on page 1 of Mr. Jäger's letter to the police he mentions three sets of papers. Appendix 1 consisting of 10 pages, Appendix 2 with 5 pages, and Appendix 3 comprising 4 pages.

These total of 19 pages were missing from the file for mysterious reasons. It is likely that some pages are dicey.

Despite my encouragement to hand over said documents, Mr. Jäger chose to remain silent and I finally turned to the Minister of Labor Ms Nahles because the Federal Employment Agency is a federal corporation under public law with self-government, which is subject to legal supervision by the Federal Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (§ 393 Abs. 1 SGB III).

A Sept. 12, 2016 email to Ms. Nahles and one on Sept. 25, 2016 with a deadline to provide the release of the 19 pages by Sept. 30, 2016 went unanswered. (Appendix 2 and 3)

As already demonstrated in previous contacts, Minister Nahles seems to be averse communicating with shudras of the Hartz IV caste and rather seems to entertain the opinion that Hartz IV recipients are legal fair game. The minister displays and conveys a strange understanding of democracy.

Manfred Jäger and the Munich Court intervened in my right to freedom of expression. Minister Nahles is aiding and abetting criminal conduct. Full access to the case file is essential in order to assess legal action against Manfred Jäger. It is as well of importance for a comprehensive and detailed complaint letter with the European Court of Human Rights regarding all three cases filed by the Jobcenter and the Federal employment Agency against us and all concerning the infringement of free speech. One is inclined to the impression that the neo-liberal economic and labor policies in Germany dispense from obligations to democratic norms.

I therefore ask to initiate proceedings against Minister Nahles in this matter.

Sincerely,

Labor Minister Nahles, extortion now new business field of the Jobcenter Munich?

Dear Minister Nahles,

The Federal Employment Agency BA belongs to your ministry's portfolio while the German Jobcenters are jointly operated by the BA and the respective community they are operating within. So in other words, the Jobcenters are within the realm of your Ministry of Labor & Social Affairs.

A citizen of a democratic country generally expects that government agencies abide by the law of their democratic state. In addition, Jobcenters carry a further responsibility based on humanistic and moral standards, providence. Providence even more so when kids are involved.

One of the fundamental human rights of a democratic state is the freedom of expression and in Germany this is guaranteed in the Basic Law. This one can and must expect from a government agency without any exception.

The Jobcenter Munich under the management of a certain Martina Musati does not seem to value this democratic right. In August 2012 a blackmail letter was sent to me because of a blog post which featured an open email to the BMAS, i.e your ministry, published in May 2012. 

This blog post had been phrased deliberately along Betteridge's Law lines. Unfortunately, this was lost on the parochial managing director Martina Musati and she failed to comprehend. Said lady also displayed an aversion to a quote of the well known US satirist 'Dilbert'. Well, you can not always satisfy the elitist pretensions of the august Bavarian ivory tower. 

Please take a look at her letter (printed on a letterhead bearing the logos of the BA, Jobcenter Munich and the City of Munich) mailed to me with the highly entertaining demand of € 10,000 (in words: ten thousand) if I do not delete said blog post. 

I take the liberty to add that in the private sector such a person would be summarily dismissed. 

In addition, I had contacted the Co-CEO of the Federal Employment Agency BA, Frank-Jürgen Weise in this awkward matter a few weeks ago. I think he is still occupied applying the final touches to his response. 

In the coming days I will send you two more messages that pertain to an interference with the freedom of expression, also perpetrated by that particular Jobcenter Munich. Interferences, which are anathema to a democratic state. 

Thank you for your attention and your time. 


Sincerely