Full disclosure: A reporter’s journey toward truth
A documentary on embedded journalism in Iraq. By Brian Palmer
sually, I begin my explanation of why and how I made my documentary, Full Disclosure, with my first trip to Iraq as an embedded journalist in 2004. Occasionally, when I have an especially enthusiastic audience, I start earlier, in 2002, when I left my job as a CNN correspondent. But beginning so far back feels like indulging in nostalgia. Given the dire situation in Iraq today, the generally superficial and timid coverage in the corporate media, and the apparent lack attention and concern among North Americans – and many Europeans – this is no time for nostalgia. So I will start in the present. There are an estimated two million Iraqi refugees, the majority of them living in Syria and Jordan. “Iraqi authorities estimate that an additional 2.7 million people have been internally displaced, most of them since the US-led invasion of 2003,” says the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. These numbers have not changed significantly in years. The UN’s Inter-Agency Information and Analysis Unit reports that Iraq’s food prices doubled between 2004 and 2008. That is a greater increase than the shockingly high global rate, seventythree percent. The rise in food prices “has contributed to the increase in the Iraqi poverty rate,” IAU says. “Only half the Iraqi population have access to safe water regularly... Fifty percent of Iraq’s untreated wastewater is discharged into rivers and canals... The current number of available school buildings is 15,815, of which fifty percent require major rehabilitation efforts... Almost one-third of the 1,809 public health centres are reported to have deteriorated due to lack of maintenance, lack of supplies, reduced or unskilled health workers.” On the political front, Iraqis themselves are working toward creating a post-occupation system of governance,


sometimes in concert, often at crosspurposes along sectarian lines. Violence has decreased – though sporadic and horrific bombings happen periodically – but the tension, discord, mistrust, and anger that caused it remain. The United States has roughly 128,000 troops in Iraq. There are more than 126,000 civilian contract employees working for US agencies. More than 13,000 of these are private security contractors – mercenaries in plain English. “Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end,” US President Barack Obama told the world in February. Attached to this promise was a little bit of not-sofine print: 50,000 troops will remain for at least another year. Moreover, such a drawdown may cause the US to rely more heavily on mercenary forces – some of whom have been implicated in

Iraqi women speak to US Marine lieutenant: Photo by Brian Palmer.

various crimes and abuses during the US occupation – to protect its interests and personnel. The remaining US troops and mercenaries will undoubtedly be called on to provide protection for the next phase of the US invasion. According to the Financial Times, senior officials from the Bush administration who played a role in the occupation are now leading a commercial charge into Iraq. Zalmay Khalilzad, former US ambassador to Iraq, has formed a company to advise corporations planning to do business in Iraq. Jay Garner, the former US army general who served as the first US pro consul in Iraq, is an adviser to Vast Exploration, a Canadian oil company doing business in Kurdistan. This is the situation in November 2009, nearly seven years after the US invaded Iraq. Our attention has migrated to Afghanistan and Pakistan. In 2004, Iraq, not Afghanistan, was the war, the one that garnered public attention. I wanted to cover it. I thought reporting from Iraq would be difficult, possibly dangerous, but that it would be relatively straightforward – observe, document, publish. My reasons for going were mixed. I did not believe the Bush administration’s case for war. News coverage by the mainstream media, including my former employer CNN, was little more than cheerleading for the invasion and occupation. I could do better job, I told myself. Also, I felt responsible to witness and report on actions taken by my government, ostensibly in my name. But, I had other reasons that I did not mention aloud. Ever. Ego. While covering the US military as a photojournalist in the 1990s, I discovered that I had a surprisingly large reservoir of repressed machismo inside me. As much as I mistrusted state power and was often critical of US’ use of military force, I was



Independent World report

US Marine patrol through Musayyib: Photo by Brian Palmer.

Independent World report



US Marine on watch atop roof of Musayyib police station: Photo by Brian Palmer.



Independent World report

Iraqi men detained at US base in Iskandariyah: Photo by Brian Palmer.

attracted viscerally to the brotherhood of the armed forces – the sense of purpose, duty, and honour. Moreover, my dad had served in the army. As much as he said he hated his experience – he was a black man serving in the 1950s, when racial discrimination defined the US society – he still proudly told tales of his service. And I remembered them. Vanity. I was on the verge of fortyyears old and I had never covered a real war. This is a rite of passage for serious journalists, at least according to conventional wisdom. I simply could not stay on the sidelines. As a political progressive – and as a black American who identifies strongly with the ordinary people who wind up on the business end of the war machine, not the decision makers – I found these feelings odd, embarrassing, but nonetheless powerful. With these and my other more noble impulses, I went to war. I decided to embed with the US military for cold, hard reasons: I spoke no Arabic; I did not have enough money to pay for translators, transport, and protection;

and I had no major news organisation supporting me. I shot photos on a freelance basis for Sipa Press and wrote dispatches for the website I reasoned that my identity – progressive, minority, student of history, mature in comparison to twentysomething US Marines – would allow me to maintain critical, professional distance from the men I lived with and covered. It did not work out that way. Fundamentally, to embed with the military means becoming a member of a unit, a kind of nonfunctioning, dependent addition to a squad or platoon, to be sure, but still a part of it. One lives, eats, and sleeps with the troops, men – and in this case the unit was all men, because women are not allowed to serve in direct combat roles – who keep one alive. Over the weeks I was with the unit, First Battalion/Second Marine Regiment, I felt myself becoming closer to the men, in spite of myself. There were times when I did not ask hard questions I should have, that I put my camera down when I should have shot. Later, I recognised it as a subconscious desire to protect

the young men I was with. Proximity and dependence breed affinity. That is the genius of the Pentagon’s embedding system. After coming home from Iraq, I realised I had fallen short of the goal I set for myself: to tell clear and uncensored stories of what I witnessed. No one censored me, but there were times I censored myself. I served no one by doing this, certainly not the Iraqis I met while on Marine patrols; not the Marines, who were put in harm’s way to kill and be killed under a veil of half-truths and lies; and not myself. It was easy to see the Marines as unique individuals, nice guys with wives and kids back home in the States. But I needed to remember that each time they ventured into the streets of Iraqi cities, into the living rooms and kitchens of Iraqi families, they served as powerful, sometimes deadly, instruments of the US government. So I went back twice more, in 2005 and 2006, to try to get it right, to tell a fuller, less mediated story. Full Disclosure is the result of that process.

Independent World report



Marine Lance Corporal on routine foot patrol in Musayyib: Photo by Brian Palmer.

The documentary consists largely of vérité footage and interviews I shot in Iraq. It offers a view of the US occupation of Iraq from my vantage point, first in Babil province, and then in Anbar, Iraq, from 2004 to 2006. In 2007 and 2008 in the US, I follow one Marine I patrolled with in Iraq, Staff Sergeant David Marino. Over the course of several interviews, he reveals the damage two Iraq tours did to him, while also confronting the damage he inflicted in Iraq. Full Disclosure is not a war movie that emphasises bang-bang. Life in Iraq during the times I visited was cyclical, with long periods of tedium punctuated by blasts of terror. The terror was dramatic and terribly significant, but the tedium was just as important. I concentrate on the seemingly ordinary stretches of time during which US troops – young men trained to fight and destroy and who speak no Arabic – move among Iraqi civilians, conducting house searches, running routine foot patrols, pulling checkpoint duty, and escorting civil-affairs missions.

They did not know the culture or history of Iraq. They were not equipped to do the things that Iraqis needed most: mediation, negotiation, construction – in a word, healing. They often operated without the support of experienced advisers, and frequently without capable translators. And yet our political leaders ordered them to undertake a bewildering array of tasks, among them finding an enemy they could not see and winning the hearts and minds of the rest of the population. This put a heavy burden on US troops. But the greatest burden was – and still is – borne by Iraqis. Full Disclosure does not end in Iraq. It follows Staff Sergeant Marino at home as he battles Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury. It also includes essential information about incidents shown on screen gleaned from official US military documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. More than six years after the invasion, as the Obama administration speaks of a drawdown of the US combat presence, we as a nation have not addressed the

consequences of our actions in Iraq. And we have not yet bothered to examine how the record of our policies and practices in Iraq might affect future civilmilitary endeavours in countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, and beyond. I want Full Disclosure to serve as such an examination – and as a cautionary tale for future US military enterprises. �

Brian Palmer

– photographer, writer,

teacher and filmmaker based in New York – has written for Mother Jones, Newsweek, New York Times Magazine and other publications. Full disclosure is his first documentary film. For more, see:



Independent World report