First, she idolized him.
Now, she calls him "an old gangster."
To Adriana Saftoiu, Traian Basescu has been "more than Oxford," as she put it, "an A-class president!"
The day before yesterday, however, while on a televised programme, Adriana Saftoiu called him "an old gangster."
Oxford?!
Or gangster?!
Of course, people who make contradictory statements may be suspected of sincerity.
We don"t deny Adriana Saftoiu"s right to be sincere and change her opinion of something or someone, especially if the object of her opinion is changing itself, from one day to the next.
We don"t even deny Adriana Saftoiu"s right to change her mind just like that and simply say that she was wrong then and now she sees things differently than before.
It may be, for instance, part of the feminine charm.
Or it may be, for instance, the difference between her current capacity as Member of Parliament on behalf of the National Liberal Party and her prior capacity of advisor to the President.
No problem.
She has the right to contradict herself.
No, the problem is that Adriana Saftoiu herself does not recognize the other people"s right to contradict themselves.
"When do we lie and when do we speak the truth?" she wondered rhetorically on television the day before yesterday. And she continued: "When we say that we have thieves around us and that we have corruption in our midst, or when we don"t say anything? That"s all!"
If she had been holding a skull, you could have thought she was Hamlet.
The entire Hamletian monologue was triggered by a controversial operation at RAFO, a company that had just received a State bond to guarantee for a 300 million EUR loan. And Adriana Saftoiu was wondering how RAFO could possibly receive such kind of support, when even President Basescu had called it a robber"s den at the beginning of his term of office.
"When do we lie and when do we speak the truth?"
Yes. We, too, suspect that the curious operation at RAFO could be, in fact, a cover for a robber"s den.
But we do not have any proof, yet.
And we also believe that Claudiu Elvis Saftoiu does not have any proof either, in either of his two capacities: husband to Adriana Saftoiu and former Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service.
Anyway, Adriana Saftoiu did not state that RAFO was a robber"s den, but only wondered when President Basescu had lied.
Thick fog.
The RAFO example was not well understood.
Being a foggy case, it cannot be mentioned and that allows the simple argument that RAFO and the robber"s den are two different economic moments.
As the signature of a great communicator, Adriana Saftoiu added: "... not even the appeal to common sense is made anymore..." (this would be a concatenation of the electoral slogan of her party boss and the electoral slogan of her former boss at Cotroceni Palace). It is, again, a monologue. This time, a mirror-front monologue.
How much common sense can one have to state, upon resigning from Cotroceni Palace in 2007, that "I continue to remain a supporter of the policies and projects of Traian Basescu" only to call him now "an old gangster."
Not to mention the fact that the emphasis was on "old." Nevertheless, her experience in this triangle with Traian Basescu and Claudiu Elvis Saftoiu, the former as President and the latter as husband and Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service, and her as wife to the latter and advisor to the former looks fairly "Mafiosi" (I"m not saying it actually is, because I don"t have the proof).
Common sense?
Well, it"s better to keep quiet.
At least you won"t be lying if you do.
• Insignificant Semantics
Adriana Saftoiu graduated in Philology in Bucharest, which explains some drifts from logic, which is not a primary discipline in her speciality.
For instance, it is not correct to wonder about the truthfulness of silence. True and false are - in traditional logic - attributes that can only be associated to assertoric propositions.
Silence cannot be deemed to be the same as "lie," even when it is evaluated in a given context.
"Not saying anything" can be deemed as shrewd, tactful or wicked. In order to make that into deception, you need to add a personal motive and a context that would persuade others to act, unknowingly, so as to satisfy such interest.
But, even so, silence cannot be deemed as a "lie."
However, to pose as a specialist in communication and to improperly use essential terms of communication - "true" and "false" (a "lie" is something "false" with an ethical attribute) - well, that"s a lie!