Asked About Sept. 11, Rice Raises a Shield of Words

Re national security advisor Condoleezza Rice’s testimony Thursday before the 9/11 commission:

Way to go, Condi. What a filibuster whitewash. Talk ‘em to death, talk around the question, talk away from the question, talk over the questioner and, when someone gets too close, throw in a few “I don’t recalls” -- but never answer directly.

As to President Bush’s remark that Rice quoted -- “I’m tired of swatting flies,” referring to terrorists -- well, I guess it takes tanks, bombs, dead Marines and a country in chaos to get those Texas flies.

Ann Johnston

Thousand Oaks

*

I have been a criminal defense lawyer for over 30 years. If Rice was the only witness to testify against my client, I would feel confident when it came time to argue my case to the jury.

Honest and effective witnesses answer the question posed. They do not repeatedly respond with canned answers that dodge the question. Jurors don’t seem to have much difficulty with this concept. Will we?

Stephen M. Hogg

Simi Valley

*

Rice used a brilliant tactic in her appearance before the commission: When asked a difficult question, she launched into long, convoluted nonanswers. The effect was to prevent questioners from asking additional questions in the 10 minutes at their disposal. When asked friendly questions, she responded “yes” or “no,” inviting more supportive questions.

Good tactic; poor strategy. This was not meant to be a lecture to a graduate seminar and looked to me like obfuscation.

Norman Palley

Culver City

*

Re “Rice Must Tell Story in Full,” editorial, April 7: Quite frankly, it appears that whatever Rice said to the commission would be undermined. In addition to your editorial, the commentaries in your paper and in the media in general prejudged her testimony. Your editorial, in particular, quite liberally poisoned the well. Whatever she did was doomed to be trumpeted as a self-serving “cover-up.”

On the other hand, former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has been portrayed as a gentle, peace-loving, misunderstood, underappreciated individual, rather than the self-serving, arrogant opportunist that he appears to be. The sport of Monday-morning quarterbacking has reached its summit in these almost farcical 9/11 commission hearings.

Frank Diani

Goleta

*

Nothing Rice said can overcome the fact that it was Rice who was saying it. As her biography on the White House website indicates, she was appointed on account of her expertise on the Soviet Union, our Cold War enemy, and had no particular expertise in terrorism.

That says all we need to know about the Bush administration’s pre-9/11 priorities.

Jeremy Anderson

Redlands

*

Re “A Testimony to Racial Limbo,” Commentary, April 7:

The subheading, “Rice’s success pleases neither conservative whites nor liberal blacks,” struck me. That leaves the middle of the body politic as her base. The middle, where I consider I am, is the home of even-tempered, calm thinkers, nonjudgmental and competent -- just where a national security advisor should be.

Why does Debra Dickerson state that Rice is incompetent? She is entitled to her opinion, but there is no basis for a flat statement. Perhaps it is Dickerson who is guilty of incompetence.

John A. Woodward III

Los Angeles

*

I work for a living, so I haven’t been following the 9/11 commission testimony word for word. Did anyone ask Rice: Just how much money did we give the Taliban three years ago?

Edward Bowers

Sherman Oaks