Yahoo! News - Rice Rejects Calls for Public Testimony
CRAWFORD, Texas - National security adviser Condoleezza Rice is waging a vigorous defense of her actions in every public forum except one: the Sept. 11 commission where she would be questioned about the government's failure to prevent the terrorist attacks.

Rice declared Sunday night that "nothing would be better, from my point of view, than to be able to testify" to the commission. But, she added, "there is an important principle involved here: It is a long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress." She has appeared before panel members in closed session.

OK then, what's the difference between appearing in a closed session and a public one? The closed session doesn't count as "testimony"? No oath being taken? Why bother with it all? And when did this administration develop "principles" anyway?