Stifling Dissent...

...or just stifling violence?

I've read this story, and I don't see any stifling of dissent or "chill" on protest activities. Even the hysterical (and yes I said 'hysterical') would-be protester doesn't claim that she was threatened in any way - simply asked if she was planning on attending protests.

Now given the various stories being published about anarchists rubbing gunpowder on themselves to create false alarm in the subways, the history of violence at past protests, etc. I'd say that the FBI would be negligent if they didn't at least do some minimal due diligence in sniffing out violence.

If you're planning to protest non-violently then what's the problem? The problem is that many of these "protesters" seem to think that violence on behalf of their particular cause is perfectly fine. That's dangerous...and demented...

I tip my hat to the FBI for their actions here. If the simple act of asking a few qustions is enough to put a chill on violence by thugs who use these protests as an excuse for their anti-social and destructive behavior, then ask away...