( CNN ) -- While others will sharply disagree , I believe John Brennan deserves a national salute for his press conference yesterday about the CIA . At a time when we are tearing ourselves apart over one controversy after another , he provided a model of a calm , adult leader trying to put the country first . No doubt there will be counterattacks trying to blow holes in his story . Maybe there are some . But we sorely needed someone to come forth with views that are more balanced and impartial than a tragically one-sided report released this week by the Senate Intelligence Committee . There were half a dozen aspects of the Brennan press conference that were welcome : . For starters , he placed the interrogation program into a context that too many are forgetting . As Brennan pointed out , the attacks that morning of 9/11 terrified the country and we quickly looked to the CIA to track down those responsible and ensure they never attacked us again . We did n't want those agents -- as the phrase goes -- to bring a baguette to a knife fight ; both the White House and Congress wanted them to do whatever it took . Brennan also made clear that the CIA ( he served as deputy director under President George W. Bush ) was not prepared to run a detention and interrogation program -- who would have thought they needed one ? They put it together quickly , but -- as Brennan readily conceded -- some agents then went far beyond the rules , employing brutal interrogation techniques . He should also have conceded that was torture . What has been missing in much of the hyperventilation over the Senate report is that the number of people water boarded was actually tiny : three says Brennan , though the Senate Committee insists the number is slightly higher . With numbers that small , it is far more believable that most agents -- as Brennan said -- acted within the rules . Is this any basis for treating the CIA like a brutal , rogue operation ? In law school , one of the first lessons learned is how important distinctions are . Brennan made a crucial one : the difference between causation and correlation . The agency , he says , gained valuable intelligence -- such as leads on bin Laden -- from prisoners who had undergone enhanced interrogation techniques ( `` EITs '' in the trade ) . BUT it is unclear whether they might have given that same information had they not been treated to EITs . The latter , he kept insisting , is `` unknowable . '' In other words , he does not think that harsh techniques necessarily caused detainees to open up . Yet it is also clear from his version of events that interrogators saw a correlation : Valuable leads could often come after harsh techniques . This correlation makes it easier to understand why Bush officials would want to continue the EITs , and why so many CIA directors and deputy directors defend the program . This is a distinction that is thus very , very important . To be fair , Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein insists that much of the information given up by detainees was obtained before they were subjected to EITs . This disagreement between her and Brennan is one of several that need further scrutiny . But Brennan 's version of events lends credence to the notion that neither the agency nor the Bush administration was acting as criminally as their critics charge . On one side , we now have a stinging indictment of the CIA drawn up by committee staff members all hired by Democrats . Only Democratic members of the Committee approved their report . Their report was drawn up based upon millions of documents , but not a single interview with CIA agents . On the other side , we have a well-laid out defense coming from John Brennan , who worked in the White House under Bill Clinton and was so trusted by another Democrat , Barack Obama , that he was appointed to run one of the most sensitive organizations in government , the CIA . This same man admits that the CIA made many mistakes , that the interrogation program was deeply flawed , and that it was properly stopped -- but he insists that overall , CIA agents deserve respect for bravely putting their lives on the line for the country -- some 20 have died -- and very importantly , for helping to prevent a new 9/11 . Given this background , is n't John Brennan at least as credible as the Committee , if not more so ? Are n't his views more balanced -- and thus deserving of respect ? Should n't his views help us to moderate the red hot coverage in the press and the monotonous partisan attacks among politicians ? I think so . One more thing : Brennan asked us to keep things in perspective . We need to do that -- to remember what makes us Americans . No other country to my knowledge has been so transparent about its paramilitary techniques in the midst of a dangerous war . Indeed , we all know what the terrorists would have done had they captured a bunch of Americans : They would have butchered every last one . Good for John Brennan , he 's helping us think clearly again .
David Gergen : CIA chief is talking sense about the Senate interrogation program . John Brennan says Gergen puts it in perspective , explains its origins and abuses . He says John Brennan is providing more balanced view than partisan CIA committee report .