SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan (R) listens as U.S. President Barack Obama nominates him to become the next CIA director at the White House in Washington January 7, 2013. (Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)
CIA Nominee John Brennan's Worry Over Torture Ended with Who Might Get Blamed
Though equipped with inside knowledge of the Bush era program, John Brennan took no visible steps to end it
Jan 30, 2013
As John Brennan readies for confirmation hearings as CIA director, re-surfaced episodes of how the spy operative and national security adviser dealt with knowledge about the torture program under the Bush administration shows that his reticence about painful coercive techniques employed by the CIA on suspected terrorists was less about the unlawful acts themselves, but about who would get the blame if and when word about them slipped out.
As Reuters reports Wednesday, citing unnamed officials with knowledge of those years, Brennan showed concern "that if details of the program became public, it would be CIA officers who would face criticism, rather than the politicians and lawyers who approved them."
Other officials, according to Reuters, say that Brennan possessed personal concerns about "many elements of the program" but only "voiced those concerns privately" inside the agency. There was no indication that he did anything to stop the mistreatment of those being held in CIA detention facilities, black sites, or elsewhere.
Obama's nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA makes it the second time his name has been floated for the position by the president. Brennan withdrew his name from consideration in early 2009 after groups called attention to the role he may have played in the torture and renditions program under Bush.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
As John Brennan readies for confirmation hearings as CIA director, re-surfaced episodes of how the spy operative and national security adviser dealt with knowledge about the torture program under the Bush administration shows that his reticence about painful coercive techniques employed by the CIA on suspected terrorists was less about the unlawful acts themselves, but about who would get the blame if and when word about them slipped out.
As Reuters reports Wednesday, citing unnamed officials with knowledge of those years, Brennan showed concern "that if details of the program became public, it would be CIA officers who would face criticism, rather than the politicians and lawyers who approved them."
Other officials, according to Reuters, say that Brennan possessed personal concerns about "many elements of the program" but only "voiced those concerns privately" inside the agency. There was no indication that he did anything to stop the mistreatment of those being held in CIA detention facilities, black sites, or elsewhere.
Obama's nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA makes it the second time his name has been floated for the position by the president. Brennan withdrew his name from consideration in early 2009 after groups called attention to the role he may have played in the torture and renditions program under Bush.
As John Brennan readies for confirmation hearings as CIA director, re-surfaced episodes of how the spy operative and national security adviser dealt with knowledge about the torture program under the Bush administration shows that his reticence about painful coercive techniques employed by the CIA on suspected terrorists was less about the unlawful acts themselves, but about who would get the blame if and when word about them slipped out.
As Reuters reports Wednesday, citing unnamed officials with knowledge of those years, Brennan showed concern "that if details of the program became public, it would be CIA officers who would face criticism, rather than the politicians and lawyers who approved them."
Other officials, according to Reuters, say that Brennan possessed personal concerns about "many elements of the program" but only "voiced those concerns privately" inside the agency. There was no indication that he did anything to stop the mistreatment of those being held in CIA detention facilities, black sites, or elsewhere.
Obama's nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA makes it the second time his name has been floated for the position by the president. Brennan withdrew his name from consideration in early 2009 after groups called attention to the role he may have played in the torture and renditions program under Bush.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.