Posted for Posterity (Historical Record)
Link to original Today Show video:
Video uploaded by NBC Today Show on February 15, 2018 features Samantha Grady a student witness to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting that took place on February 14, 2018. During the interview there are a number of statements and actions that do not make normal sense. Those behavioral aspects and anomalies are listed below:
At the beginning of the interview Samantha Grady is smiling.
Throughout the interview the NBC hosts provide leading statements that frame the narrative in an emotional manner.
At the 0:50 mark an NBC host asks if Samantha is ok. Samantha responds by covering her face and stating "I'm ok" while emitting a slight giggle. She then states "Thank you" and emits a slight laugh once again.
At the 1:15 mark Samantha Grady states " Well I was doing an assignment for my holocaust class" - (holocaust class?)
On-screen graphics displayed by the NBC Today show at the 1:43 mark states "Wounded Student Speaks Out". Samantha Grady appears not to be injured and is moving her entire body freely and exhibiting no pain during this entire interview which takes place one day after the alleged shooting.
At the 1:53 mark Samantha Grady exhibits lots of animated descriptive hand movements and body movements. No sign of discomfort due to an injury is apparent.
At the 2:16 mark the NBC hosts provide more leading emotional statements.
At the 2:38 mark the NBC hosts provides the following leading statement " And we were reading that your friend suggested to you, just get a book, hold up a book".
At the 2:42 mark Samantha Grady states "Yeah, she was the one who pushed me and we were running, like we were already situated in the....umm... by the bookshelf, and she was like grab a book, grab a book so I took a book......it was a tiny book......but I took a book and I held it up...and I believe...maybe....that some....the book kind of deterred some of the bullets...err....so they didn't hit me so bad (pause) ly....but she was the one who gave me the idea........(at this point the subjects eyes go down as if reading from a script) yeah....she definitely helped....a lot.
More leading questions from the Today Show hosts draw upon emotions and reuniting with her family.
Subjects hand gestures at the 3:35 and 3:55 mark is not the typical type of gesture one would normally use for holding a cell phone in actuality.
At the 4:00 mark when Samantha Grady states " I'm in the ambulance and I'm on my way to North Broward, and I will, and try (once again makes odd cell phone hand gesture) and come there and then just ask for me, I'll tell them your names....and......that''s what happened. (Subjects eyes dart off to the side quickly - this is likely body language showing self reaffirmation via her stating "thats what happened" combined with the sideways eye movements.)
At 4:23 mark eyes quickly dart left after describing the family reunion at hospital (possible also self affirmation of her story).
Throughout the rest of the interview the NBC hosts continue to focus upon emotional matters such as family discussions at the hospital and Samantha being a brave young woman and having a supportive family.
Propaganda fact: Drawing upon emotions helps to cement a narrative within the psyche of the person being affected by the propaganda. An emotional appeal is the most natural form of persuasion. It’s powerful. It’s effective. Sometimes, it can even support a weak argument, or obscure a good argument’s logical focus. Normally, if you see a politician or a TV show host constantly drawing upon emotions to tell a story, rather than simply getting at the facts, then there is cause to be suspect of the subject matter. An appeal to emotion, while not necessarily untrue, is a logical fallacy, because it focuses attention on the audience’s feelings — their fears or dreams or sympathies — rather than on a valid, logical argument. Sometimes, it’s a distraction. A red herring.
In this case, the most significant anomalies that stands out in this Today Show interview are 1) the fact the interviewee is being portrayed as injured but shows no apparent sign of injury or discomfort due to an injury, and 2) the witness states she "deterred' (word makes no sense in regards to the subject matter) bullets from a high powered assault rifle with a "tiny" book. This statement stands out due to the fact that the video linked below clearly shows that an AR-15 is capable of shooting through 15 phone books. Thus, its relatively easy to determine that her statement cannot be factual, and had a book been shot, she would have been well aware of it specifically occurring and not wondering whether it actually took place. She also most likely would have had a gunshot wound to the face if she was holding the book in front of her face while attempting to "deter" bullets that were hitting it. If it was a tiny book she most likely would have had serious hand injuries from holding it up while it was being shot with an AR-15 assault rifle at relatively close range.
Link to video showing AR-15 shooting through 15 phone books.
