WELCOME

In the wake of Sunday's massacre, the site said it

June 18, 2017 by Kimberly Parks

In the wake of Sunday's massacre, the site said it began updating its live video feeds to ensure it had not been hijacked by the gunman.

Facebook said in a statement a person who reported the incident to police was not in danger.

"The video has been removed from Facebook due to security concerns and we will continue to update our live stream of events to ensure an accurate representation of what happened," the company said.

Facebook has since said it will take further legal action to block the livestream, with Facebook in the process of making it visible on all its sites.

"We're reviewing all legal options, including the removal of the livestream, and will continue to monitor developments," Facebook said in a statement.This is the fourth in a series of articles examining the current state of the debate over the use of drones in the U.S. drone war. Last week, I made a point of noting that President Obama had called for the use of drones on U.S. soil to prevent terrorism. The issue is not whether the U.S. has the ability to use the drone program, but rather whether it is more likely to prevent attacks as a result.

In the new post, I will explain why the current debate over the use of drones is so important and explain why the debate is so important. After all, the debate over drone use is not about whether the drones are "weapons" or not, but about whether a drone is really a weapon. What does it matter if the U.S. uses drones as an effective way to target terrorist targets, or rather, why does it care so much about it?