A certain segment of Norwegians reacted to terrorism by being enthusiastically for it. These included the leaders of the Labour Party, including the leaders at

A certain segment of Norwegians reacted to terrorism by being enthusiastically for it. These included the leaders of the Labour Party, including the leaders at the Labour Party's Utoya youth camp. http://zalmi.blogspot.com/2011/07/utoya-not-so-innocent-youth-camp.html http://zalmi.blogspot.com/2011/07/utoya-not-so-innocent-yout... http://www.debbieschlussel.com/40472/karma-2-norway-utoya-camp-was-also-fatah-plo-terrorist-camp/ http://www.debbieschlussel.com/40472/karma-2-norway-utoya-ca... This is a factor that seems to go unmentioned in all discussions of the Utoya massacre, but is necessary knowledge to understand the event in its entirety. It adds detail to Breivik's motive, and it raises the question of why there has been no condemnation of the Labour Party's support for similar massacres elsewhere being conducted on racial and religious lines so long as they happen far away and are done by a faction that the Party approves of. This is beside the point that Schneier makes, so I apologise for going off topic. To that point, the US overreacted (an understatement) and Norway faced little threat of further attacks. Norway did consider fudging its laws to give Breivik a life term as a mental inmate rather than the statutory limit of years as a prisoner, and that can be questioned as an expansion of security. More generally, no one in Norway could argue a need for greatly expanded security since the threat ended with Breivik's capture.