How many times has the US said ‘just trust us’ and then lied?
By: Rachel Marsden
In a single day, two members of the American press asking for clarification 
and evidence from the Biden administration were painted as sympathizers of 
Russia and ISIS.
Efforts by US media to establish objective truth – rather than acting as 
stenographers for the government and its official narratives – is now apparently 
considered an act of disloyalty to your country, and loyalty to its enemies. 
The first instance occurred during a gaggle in which the White House press 
secretary, Jen Psaki, addressed the US-led liquidation of the latest “ISIS 
leader,” Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi, in Idlib province, northwestern 
Syria, on Wednesday night. According to President Joe Biden’s televised 
retelling of events, the target blew himself up and took some family members and 
others out with him just as American troops were moving in for the kill. Why 
would he do that? Because he’s a “coward,” Biden suggested.
“I know the US has put out its statement that [ISIS] detonated the bomb 
themselves. But will the US provide any evidence? Because there may be people 
that are skeptical of the events that took place and what happened to 
civilians,” NPR White House Correspondent Ayesha Rascoe asked.
“Skeptical of the US military’s assessment when they went and took out the 
leader of ISIS?” Psaki replied. “That they are not providing accurate 
information? And ISIS is providing accurate information?” 
Note that the journalist didn’t say that ISIS (IS, Islamic State) had a counter 
narrative, just that the official story put out by the US government is worthy 
of skepticism. And the US has certainly earned skepticism in Syria. Not only 
have they peddled narratives portraying the Western private contractor-founded 
White Helmets activists as do-good humanitarians and objective witnesses rather 
than a convenient propaganda front, but just last November, the New York Times 
published a story with the headline: ‘How the U.S. Hid an Airstrike That Killed 
Dozens of Civilians in Syria’. In March 2019, according to the report, an F-15E 
fighter jet dropped a “500-pound bomb” on the town of Baghuz, right before 
another aircraft dropped two more bombs of 2,000 pounds each. It was only after 
the Times’ investigation that CENTCOM admitted it may have killed up to 80 
people, including civilians, but argued the women and children may have been 
“combatants.”
Now one might figure that anyone in a war zone is fair game. OK, but then don’t 
be surprised when their countrymen end up hating the US for the next several 
generations (you know, because of the ‘freedoms’, as successive administrations 
routinely claim). 
The Syrian conflict was also the backdrop to the US-backed murder of Iranian 
General Qassem Soleimani at neighboring Iraq’s Baghdad Airport two years ago, 
after which the Trump administration publicly claimed self-defense and US 
intelligence suggesting that Soleimani was planning an imminent attack on 
American interests. A White House memo later debunked that excuse. 
The same day as Psaki was fending off journalists who weren’t automatically 
buying the latest Hollywood movie scenario being peddled by Washington, State 
Department spokesman Ned Price accused a veteran journalist of favoring Russia 
over America when he dared to demand evidence for Price’s assertion that Russia 
was setting up a ‘false flag’ event to justify a Ukrainian invasion. 
Price accused Russia during a press briefing of “developing a fake pretext to 
initiate and potentially justify military aggression against Ukraine.” Veteran 
journalist Matt Lee of the Associated Press asked for proof – actual evidence to 
accompany Price’s assertions. Price then replied: “If you doubt the credibility 
of the U.S. Government, of the British Government, of other governments, and 
want to find solace in information that the Russians are putting out – that is 
for you to do.”
A long-standing respected member of the American press was promptly smeared – 
all because he dared show skepticism of what could ultimately become a NATO and 
US pretext for war rather than a Russian pretext. False flag rhetoric, 
suggesting some kind of potential future threat to a NATO ally, has been used by 
the military alliance to justify moving weapons ever closer to the Russian 
border.
The US is effectively setting up a narrative whereby anything that occurs now on 
the Ukraine-Russia border could be pinned on Russia and justify NATO aggression, 
regardless of who might be responsible for the act. 
How many times has the US already created false flag pretexts to justify wars 
and invasions throughout history and then routinely lied to the public about the 
reality of the ensuing conflicts?
There has been the ‘imminent threat’ of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that 
justified that country’s invasion. There was the ‘imminent threat’ with the Gulf 
of Tonkin incident that sparked US involvement in the Vietnam War, followed by 
the spectacle of the defeatist exit from the embassy in Saigon after telling the 
public that America and its allies were ‘winning’ the war. There was the 
‘imminent threat’ of the Marxist Sandinistas in Nicaragua that supposedly 
justified secret weapons sales to Iran to fund the Contras, all while lying to 
the public about it. Then the ‘imminent threat’ of an armed Iran. More recently, 
there was the ‘imminent threat’ of the Taliban in Afghanistan, resulting in the 
White House declaring their ‘defeat’ post-invasion, followed years later by an 
abrupt US military exit from the country with the Taliban retaking total 
control.
Fear has always allowed the US government to mobilize public support – whether 
of communism, terrorism, or even a virus. Fear has also given them far too often 
a carte blanche to take actions that are of questionable value to the average 
person, whose interests are routinely sacrificed for those of an elite few. They 
no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt on anything that comes out of their 
mouths. And standing up for the American people’s best interests isn’t enemy 
action – it’s the very definition of patriotism. 
COPYRIGHT 2022 RACHEL MARSDEN