I can kind of see how the first two could maybe, possibly, be seen as not insane. However, how do you defend the Bundestrojaner thing, in light of the fact that what he intended was literally impossible?
I would call that a profound lack of knowledge (or concious ignorance thereof?) in combination with the fact that it's always better to claim the impossible (because you can polarise the masses more easily and scale down your claim later on once the main challenge - getting things things passed - is done with).