Critical discourse Analysis of Torturing Male Prisoners in Abu Ghraib in The Independent's Political reports

: The present study under the title "Critical discourse Analysis of Torturing Male Prisoners in Abu Ghraib in The Independent's Political reports" is interested in revealing issues of power, dominance and ideologies in the political reports which talk about violence against men in Abu Ghraib. Revealing these issues in the report will be according to the use of CDA approach depending on the two scholars who are interested in this approach, Tuen Van Dijk, Norman Fairclough. In this study, there is a use of language as a tool to express dominance, power and ideology. With these linguistic elements, the previous issues are exploited indirectly by the American forces.

The present study under the title "Critical discourse Analysis of Torturing Male Prisoners in Abu Ghraib in The Independent's Political reports" is interested in revealing issues of power, dominance and ideologies in the political reports which talk about violence against men in Abu Ghraib. Revealing these issues in the report will be according to the use of CDA approach depending on the two scholars who are interested in this approach, Tuen Van Dijk, Norman Fairclough. In this study, there is a use of language as a tool to express dominance, power and ideology. With these linguistic elements, the previous issues are exploited indirectly by the American forces.
We aim in this study to identify all the linguistic elements which symbolize violence in the selected report. Then, we will explain its function in this report which is used pragmatically. After that, we explain the issues of power, dominance and ideologies and check whether they are used in these reports implicitly or explicitly.
We selected one report to be analyzed in this paper. This report was taken from the British Newspaper "The Independent". Selecting these Extracts was based on the using of many linguistic elements which refer to violence in Abu Ghraib.
We used the qualitative approach in analyzing the data, because we deal with behavioral study, and it is the preferable approach in analyzing studies like these. In this method, we depend on the narrative way in the analysis rather than using numbers or statistics. The model adopted in this study will be an eclectic one depending on Fairclough's three-dimensional approach and Van Dijk's socio-cognitive approach. These models are interested in the texts with their social and cultural function.
The findings have included the use of linguistic elements of violence in these reports in many lines. The function of these linguistic elements was used indirectly in a hidden way. The study also revealed that issues of power, dominance and ideologies were exploited pragmatically in the American speeches. Our aims and hypotheses have been achieved in the findings and conclusions. In the last lines of chapter five, we gave some recommendations and suggestions for further studies. Keywords: violence, men, Abu Ghraib, Ton Van Dyck, Norman Fairclough.

Introduction to Discourse Analysis
The term discourse analysis was introduced in 1952 by the linguist Zellig Harris as an approach of analyzing how the sentences are combined with each other, whether it is spoken or written. Harris differentiates between the linguistic and non-linguistic practices. He studies the meaning which is beyond the level of sentence. Harris studied the way in which the language features are combined and occur in particular situation and style of texts. So, discourse has linguistic features associated with particular meanings (paltridge 2012, P. 2).
Discourse is the study of language. It investigates the relationship between the language and the context in which it is used. Before Harris's discourse analysis, the linguists were interested in the analysis of single sentence. Besides Harris's publishing his paper in 1952, the emergence of semiotic and the structuralist approach in France played important role in the narrative study. With the emergence of pragmatic which means study the meaning in context, the speech act theory and the conversational maxims were also interested in the study of discourse in its social practices, presented by its linguists Austin (1962), Searle (1969 and Grice (1975) (McCarthy 1991. According to (Levinson,1983) The word "pragmatics" is often used to refer to the study of using language. Whereas "discourse analysis" refers to the study how written and spoken languages come with each other to generate coherence and meaning. In the earlier studies, the phrase "discourse analysis" is used to refer to the contextual meaning which refers to a specific meaning, and the textual meaning of how the linguistic elements are connected to each other in creating the meaning (Gee and Handford 2012: P 1).

CDA Approach
Critical discourse analysis (hence for CDA) is an approach to discourse analysis created by a group of scholars to denote the theory which is identified as Critical Linguistics (hence for CL). CDA approach to discourse sees and treats with language as a social practice and studies language and the context in which it is used. This approach provides large investigations in the relation between language and power (Wodak & Meyer 2001: P 1,2).
Critical Discourse Analysis' development must be viewed in the context of these expanding trends toward academic marketization. In some ways, Critical Discourse Analysis was a reaction to such changes, as Norman Fairclough and others focused their critical attention on academic language. In a literal sense, however, the rise of 'CDA' is a result of the growth of marketing rhetoric into academic institutions. To be true, radicals have already attempted to dissect the linguistic intricacies of dominant and dominating languages. However, these concepts are now being presented as forming a separate effort known as 'Critical Discourse Analysis' (Weiss and Wodak 2003: p 42).
In the early of 1990s, CDA approach appeared as a group of academic , as a result of short symposium in Amsterdam. Supported by the university of Amsterdam, two days of meeting held by the pioneers Tuen van Dijk, Norman Fairclough, Gunther Kress, Theo van Leeuwen and Ruth Wodak got amazing opportunity to discuss CDA approach and other discourse analysis theories and approaches. The gathering allowed participants to confront one other's extremely different and distinct views , which, while they have altered greatly since 1991, remain relevant in many respects (Wodak & Meyer 2009: P. 3 ).
In the 1970s , CDA approach, which is considered one of the most important and influential approach to discourse, became a method of investigation and became a field of study in discourse analysis (Yaghoobi 2009).
CDA is considered new approach added to the investigations of the variety of the analysis of texts. It is better to consider it as an approach or attitude used in the analyzing of the text , not method used in the analyzing texts step-by-step. CDA approach seeks to consider the most important textual and environmental aspects ,including historical ones, that influence the creation and understanding of a given text. It makes an attempt to realize that actual texts need some reality from the real-world , depending on the environments in which it happens in (Miller 1997: P 78).

Approaches of Critical Discourse Analysis
The goal of this title is to provide extensive descriptions of key techniques to Critical Discourse Analysis. It focuses on Fairclough's critical method, Wodak's discourse-historical approach, and Van Dijk's sociocognitive approach, as well as the work of three famous researchers. The conclusion of this study is that a mix of these three methodologies can be effective in critical text analysis.

A Three-Dimensional approach (Norman Fairclough)
According to Richardson (2007: P 37), Fairclough's method in analyzing CDA approach is the most successful approach. According to this method, CDA is considered as the study of the connection between the actual language usage and larger cultural and social frameworks. Fairclough's model views discourse as a cyclical process by considering the social activities shape the environment and situation in which texts are generated, and texts help shape society be influencing the attitudes of people in society.

Discourse-Historical Approach (Ruth Wodak)
Discourse-Historical Approach (hence for DHA) looks into historical, social, and political subjects in order to acquire enough knowledge on the discursive actions that these topics represent. This necessitates a close examination of discursive behaviors that result in diachronic changes in discourse genre (Wodak & Meyer 2001: P 65).
Wodak names her method "discourse sociolinguistics" since it incorporates both a discourse historical and a socio-cognitive approach (Wodak 1996: P 3).
According to Blommaert (2005: P 28), Wodak with her colleagues devised a historical approach in discourse that investigates the history of phrases and sentences. DHA approach begins with original documents that are supplemented with ethnographic researches about the past, and then the processes of collecting and analyzing data of current news reporting, political issues, lay beliefs, and discourses are carried out.

Socio-Cognitive approach (Teun Van Dijk)
Van Dijk's socio-cognitive method is only one example of a paradigm that connects textual, cognitive, and social systems. Social cognition mediates the relationship between textual and social structure. This mediation is defined as ''The system of mental representations and processes of group members''. According to Van Dijk (1993b: 280), social cognition is theoretically required for the mediation of microlevel concepts such as text and macrolevel concepts such as social interactions. Indeed, a theory that links textual structures to social cognition and social cognition to social structures is required to explain how texts might be socially productive (Hart 2010: 15).

Methodology
The collected data are analysed qualitatively using the qualitative approach. Using this approach means that analyzing of the data is interpretative ,depending on the past experiences of the participants. Qualitative approach requires identifying the history , gender and the personal background in the interpretation of the data (Creswell 2014: 237).
One of the important features in the qualitative approach is the variety of using ways in collecting data. These ways include, documents, researcher diaries, observations, making interviews and video and audio recordings (Saunders, et al 2019 :638).
The materials are collected from the political report which is related to violence in Abu Ghraib prison. It is chosen from the official website of the British Newspaper ''The Independent". These data are available as written documents on the official website of this institution. The analysis is based on the eclectic model depending on the two scholars, Norman Fairclough and Teun Van Dijk. Fairclough's approach depends on three dimensional approach in which it brings textual, discursive and sociocultural practices together. Van Dijk's approach focuses on text, social cognition and society. 5. Data Analysis 5.1 It never left me: Abu Ghraib torture survivors finally get their day in court. "The Independent" Extract 1: " The images of torture at Abu Ghraib shocked the world when they emerged nearly 15 years ago. Bound and naked men piled on top of each other in a pyramid. Hooded prisoners connected to electrical cables. A barking dog held inches away from a face fixed in terror. Just as memorable as the horror of the victims were the smiling American soldiers present in many of the images. Their grinning faces symbolised a kind of unthinking cruelty that came to define the war for a generation of Iraqis. The photographs tell a story, but they do not tell the whole story. While a handful of US soldiers were punished for their role in the scandal, others were not. " These lines start with the phrase "the images" as evidence which documents torture at Abu Ghraib. These photographs appeared firstly since 15 years. In its first appearance, all of people in the world were shocked about these practices especially they were committed by the American forces which are considered formal forces. This reaction resulted from the common belief that America is a democracy country. In the second line, the linguistic elements "Bound" and "naked" refer to the brutally practices which symbolize violence. Those prisoners who were bound and naked were put together one above the other forming pyramid. Putting naked and bound prisoners with each other is considered against the human rights and against the Islamic laws.
In other situation, there is another brutal practice in treating the Iraqi prisoner. In the third line, the linguistic elements "Hooded prisoners" refer to the prisoners' heads which were covered, and in this situation, they will not be able to see anything. With these covered heads, the prisoners were connected to electrical cables. Connecting the human beings with the electricity is very dangerous practice and may cause death. In another, there is a use of the dogs in torturing the prisoners. The American forces use a barking dog and they put him beside the prisoner's face as a sign of terror. They use the dogs to make the prisoners scared and make them feel weak. They also use dogs to get informations they want. The prisoners in this situation may say wrong things because they were forced under threat from dogs.
As we said earlier, the American soldiers in many images were smiling while the prisoners in the same images were suffering and may be dead. This reveals the carelessness of the American soldiers and their confidence in what they do and no one will punish them. In other line, there is also reference to "their grinning faces" in dealing with the victims. These grinning faces reveals the overuse of the power without thinking of its effects on the prisoners. It also shows that the soldiers were psychologically want to show their dominance over the Iraqis. In the last lines, there is a reference to the images which were documented as evidence of using torture that these images tell us a part of the truth and there are hidden practices were not documented by the images.
At the end, there are many soldiers were punished after Abu Ghraib scandal. They were involved in committing violence against innocent people. Beside this punishment, there are many soldiers were involved in committing violence but they were not punished. This reveals the ideological way which were followed by the American forces in punishing the soldiers. The American forces try to punish some of the suspects as evidence that they do not allow to commit these practices and that they will punish anyone who commit violence in the prison.
The American forces try to hide these practices and that this violence which were documented in images was committed by individuals and they were punished. The truth which were revealed according to the reports that these practices are not committed by individuals by themselves, but it reflects the brutally way the American as a government want in their treating with the Iraqi generations. This means that these practices were based on instructions and it reflects the American leaders' point of view about the best way they should follow to treat the Iraqis. Extract 2: "The photographs tell a story, but they do not tell the whole story. While a handful of US soldiers were punished for their role in the scandal, others were not. For the victims, there is unfinished business. Over more than a decade, a group of former detainees has been trying to sue a private military contractor they say was closely involved in the abuse at Abu Ghraib. " "The company, CACI Premier Technology, was contracted by the Pentagon to provide interrogators for the jail. To this day, it still has contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars with the US Department of Defense. " "The firm has fought to stop the case from being heard for more than 10 years, according to lawyers involved in the case. But now, the detainees will have their day in court. A ruling last month by a federal judge means that CACI will face trial for the first time for its alleged role in the Abu Ghraib torture scandal. The case alleges torture, war crimes and inhumane treatment under international law. " These lines start with the photographs as evidences of using violence. These evidences according to this report was not enough to tell the public the whole story and truth. This means that there is something hidden was not documented by pictures and that there are hidden practices were committed by the American forces were not shown to the media. In the second line, the US soldiers were punished for their role in committing violence against innocent. There are number of soldiers were punished but there are many soldiers were not punished for their practices and they still work in their institutions. Punishing number of soldiers is to tell the world that the American forces do not allow to its soldiers to commit these forbidden practices.
In the last lines of the first paragraph, we notice that some detainees were victims for violence committed by a private military contractor and he was responsible in torturing the Iraqi prisoners. The detainees were trying to sue this contractor for his crimes against them but this continued for more than decade. This case was not taken in consideration and it has been ignored and this reveals the carelessness of the American forces to punish those who were responsible.
In the second paragraph, the Pentagon has signed contracts with company called CACI premier technology to investigate about issues of violence and torture. The main task of this company is to provide interrogators for millions of dollars to investigate about these practices and to punish the soldiers who were involved in committing it. On the ground, we notice that this company did not achieve the task and did not punish the soldiers who were involved.
In the last paragraph, according to number of lawyers involved in the case, the CACI premier Technology was trying for many years to hide the case which was submitted by number of detainees against the private military contractor. Now the case will be discussed in the court according to a ruling by a federal judge that the CACI will investigate the case and it has role in the investigations of the violence in Abu Ghraib. The company wants to approve its alleged role in these scandals. Under the international law, the case reveals the war crimes and the committing of torture by the soldiers and the contractor. It also confirms the mistreatment by the American soldiers against the Iraqis. The case also confirms that there are many different forces involved in the violence. These forces were practicing the violence freely and they were working together to hide what they were practicing. As we said earlier, punishing individuals in these forces was just in a number of cases in order to show the public that America is democratic country and it does not allow its soldiers to commit violence in the prison and these practices will be investigated in the court and that these practices were not based on instructions from the American leaders and the government. The linguistic elements "Salah al-Ejaili" refer to a victim was detained randomly and was tortured brutally. Al-Ejaili was 48 years old and was working as a journalist. He was detained and tortured in Abu Ghraib. The violence against journalists reveal the random way of torturing people and that they are innocent. Al-Ejaili says "even now, I still think about it", his speech shows how he was affected psychologically. Being tortured without doing wrong things is violence and they are practices against the human rights. We notice in other words that al-Ejaili stills remember all the details of his torture. He mentions how they put a bag over his head and he cannot forget it by saying "it never really left me" as a psychological permanent disability.
Al-Ejaili is Iraqi journalist was working in Al-Jazeera news agency in 2003 after the American invasion. His job is to write reports about war events. After a bomb attack against the American forces, al-Ejaili was writing his report about the attack. He was detained by the American forces as a suspicious and then he was taken to Abu Ghraib as a criminal. He did nothing but he tries to achieve his task as a journalist. These practices which were committed against the media and the press are against the international law. According to the international laws and the human rights, the press should do their works freely and they must be protected by the armies because they do their task independently. Their job is to transfer the truth as it is without prejudice to any side of war. For this reason, they should work freely.
The American forces are now involved in committing violence against the press and were involved in putting innocent journalist in the prison. The institutions of the press are responsible to show the public the main events that happen in the society and make people know what was happening by telling the truth. Practicing violence against these institutions is violence and make the people who work in these institutions afraid of their future and feel that they are not protected.
In the last lines of this paragraph, there is a reference that there are thousands of victims who were detained in the same way as al-Ejaili. Many of the prisoners were taken from the checkpoints of the American forces. The American checkpoints were taking the people in a random way without any crimes. This random way of taking people in the checkpoints reveals that most of prisoners were innocent. Other innocent were taken from the random sweeps which were committed by the American forces in the streets and even in the houses. This means that the journalist Al-Ejaili was not the only one who was taken in a random way but there are many were taken in the same way. What is different in Al-Ejaili's case is that he was journalist and his case cannot be hidden and he presents the random way of taking people and he is considered as evidence of the American's instructions for their forces to take every person who is suspected and leave them without for many years in the prison without trial.
All these paragraphs support the claim that the American forces want to show their dominance over innocent. Taking innocent people in a random way, as we saw in Al-Ejaili's case and other cases, shows the confusion and the absence of regular system based on international laws in treating prisoners. It also shows that taking prisoners to Abu Ghraib was not based on committing crimes but it was achieved in a random way based on soldier's mood and their feeling toward the Iraqis. Extract 4 : "In the very first hour after arriving at the jail, his abuse began. His jailors called him "Al Jazeera" when they spoke to him, he says. " "They told me that either I take off my clothes or they would take them off by force, he tells The Independent by phone from Sweden, where he has been granted refugee status and been resettled. " "After that, they kept me naked for 10 hours with a black bag over my head." This paragraph shows the supplement of al-Ejaili's story. After taking him to the jail in a random way, the American forces started their practice against him directly after his arriving. This reveals that torturing prisoners in Abu Ghraib is something like a system. When the suspected arrives the jail, they start to commit violence against him. In his speech, Al-Ejaili says that those who were responsible in the jail and the jailors were calling him "Al-Jazeera" as a reference to the institutions he works in. Calling him in this way means that they do not want the press to transfer the truth to the public. It also shows that they think that this institution have relations with the terrorists. It is something awful to treat the journalists as a terrorists and it is considered violence against the press. In the second paragraph, Al-Ejaili says that the abuse against him is continuing. The American forces told him to take off his clothes. As an Islamic people, it is forbidden to take off the clothes. It is also against the humanity and may cause psychological problems to the victims. If he refuses "they would take them by force". These linguistic elements show us the using of violence and using power and authority to force the prisoners to do things they do not want to do because it is against their religion and the human rights. According to war instructions, the suspected should be treated respectfully even if they really involved in committing attacks against the American forces. Al-Ejaili now is a refugee in Sweden and he still remembers all the violence against him and still suffers psychologically.
In the last line, Al-Ejaili claims that the jailors left him naked for many hours. It is crime to leave the prisoner in the prison without clothes to wear. The Islamic religion order the believers to wear the clothes to achieve their worships freely. So, it is considered violence from the religious side and the human side and causes psychological and health problems. After leaving him naked, they put a bag over his head and he could not see any things around him. All these practices show how many American forces do not respect the religion and they do not care about the international laws and also they are not afraid of being punished for the violence. In these lines, Al-Ejaili after he was left naked in his cell for many years, he asked American soldier to bring him clothes to wear. The American soldier and was a female said "of course". We notice here that they left him naked in front of female soldiers in order to feel shy and feel that he is weak. After she came back, the American soldier brought women's underwear and threw it at him. This reveals that she tries to humiliate him as a kind of imposing dominance over the prisoners. she was laughing after doing this as a kind of humiliation and that she has the power and authority. This is psychological violence and have great effects on the sufferers' minds. This means that there are hidden instructions given indirectly to break the Iraqis socially.
In the fifth lines, we notice that Al-Ejaili was put in solitary confinement which was for dangerous criminals. Putting innocent prisoner in an isolated place makes him behave brutally and may cause big problems and affects his mind. He was suffering isolated for a days in solitary confinement to being broken in various aspects so that he will suffer even after many years.
In other lines, Al-Ejaili repeats the phrase "I was scared" many times as evidence of the horrible situation he was in. he was also afraid about his family and its future without him. He feels terrible about his life and how he can live alone in an isolation place. We see how he was affected in living in an isolation place. According to his opinion, it is something different to live with other people and listen to their point of views, even listening to their screams. This part of prison seems that it makes the prisoners behave in a strange way and makes their feeling toward the other brutal.
In the last lines, the victim seems he was living difficult situations in an isolated place. The phrase "you have no feeling or concept of time" explain the difficult situation and he is psychologically destroyed. When a person has nothing to do and has no one to speak with him, he feels that his life is meaningless. Practices like this must be taken in consideration in held the prisons' instructions and how to administrate its system. Al-Ejaili continues explaining his sufferings and how he could not focus on things because of the isolation.

Conclusions
The current study revealed many conclusions based on the research questions and the aims of the study: 1-The three selected reports which talk about violence in Abu Ghraib, were constructed using many linguistic devices. Most of these linguistic elements refer to violence and torture. We see in all the selected extracts, there are many adjectives, nouns and verbs that refer to the existence of torture and violence in Abu Ghraib. 2-The reports present direct evidences of torturing detainees. This means that there is violence in Abu Ghraib and was committed by the American forces against suspected. Many of these practices were considered as a part of the processes of interrogations. These coercive methods were legitimized by the leaders, claiming that these may help to get useful informations. They also claim that these would not cause any damage, trying to minimize their violence. 3-CDA approach reveals that the American government in torturing the prisoners, wants to impose its power indirectly. It wants to verify their dominance over the Iraqis using forbidden practices. 4-some of the linguistic devices which refer to violence were reflected implicitly in the discourses of the American leaders and their president. They give indirect instructions to their soldiers to use different practices against the detainees. They legitimize these ways to their soldiers, and their soldiers think that they do things are considered natural.