Diambil dari blog Surat dalam botol yg di ambil dari Malaysia Today.( setiap 'credit' haruslah diberi kepada setiap empunya website.)-------------
An exclusive Malaysia Today interview with an incumbent Prime Minister of a certain unnamed country who would like to remain anonymous
MT: Datuk Seri, there are allegations that the anti-Chinese rhetoric at the recent party Annual General Assembly were orchestrated and were mere rabble rousing aimed at sending the Chinese a message and ‘to put them in their right place’.
YAB: Who said so? That’s why I always say.....you know, it’s very hard to be nice. Who said this? That’s all lies.
MT: This was reported in a recent Malaysia Today article called Foot-in-mouth disease under its column The Corridors of Power.
YAB: Yes, I read that article. But that article is wrong. The article said that the speakers represented their divisions. This is not true. The speakers were delegates of their divisions but they were representatives of the State Umno, a higher body than the divisions. The divisions merely proposed the Resolutions to be tabled and debated at the Assembly. But it is up to the State Umno and the Resolution Committee at the Umno head office to filter the Resolutions and decide which ones will be accepted. The Resolution Committee also makes whatever amendments they feel should be made. So how can we believe an article that has got its facts wrong? The delegates who spoke that day did not represent their divisions. They represented the State Umno, a higher body than the divisions. So they spoke on behalf of the State Umno, not their divisions. That's why I say the Internet is full of lies and cannot be believed.
MT: But isn’t that worse?
YAB: Worse? Why worse?
MT: Well, if the speakers did not represent their divisions but instead represented the State Umno, then what they said in their speeches would make matters worse would it not? This means a body higher than the divisions approved those most seditious Resolutions.
YAB: That’s not the point.
YAB: Yes. That means I have proven that there’s one fact in that article that is wrong. So this means the article cannot be believed and it supports what I say that the Internet is full of lies.
MT: But you do not deny that what the speakers spoke were approved by the party?
YAB: I already said that’s not the point. The point is the article said that the speakers represent their divisions, which is wrong, because they represent the State Umno, a higher body. So we have to reject that entire article as full of lies.
MT: Okay, I don’t think we are going to get very far with that issue. Alright, now about the keris issue.....
YAB: What about it?
MT: Well, for two years running now, Umno Youth has been brandishing a keris at the Annual General Assembly. Don’t you think it is very provocative to brandish a weapon at a public affair?
YAB: It’s not a weapon.....and it was not a public affair.
YAB: A keris is a party symbol, not a weapon. And an Umno General Assembly is only for delegates, not for members of the public, so it can be considered a private closed-door meeting.
MT: But it was telecasted live for the whole nation to witness. Would this not make it a public affair?
YAB: No, it is still a private meeting.
MT: But then Umno Youth had a meeting with MCA Youth to clarify the incident.....if the incident is not considered provocative then why the need to clarify it?
YAB: It was not to clarify. It was just to explain.
MT: And what is the difference?
YAB: You only need to clarify when you do something wrong. We only explained because we did not do anything wrong.
MT: Okay, and what was the explanation, and was MCA Youth happy with the explanation?
YAB: Of course they were. We explained that the keris which the Umno Youth Leader brandished was made in China. Everything is made in China nowadays.
MT: China? Are you sure Datuk Seri?
YAB: Of course. The keris was introduced to the Malays by Hang Toh Ah, Hang Jer Baht, Hang Lee Kiu and all those others who were the bodyguards of Hang Li Poh, the princess from China. So the keris is actually a Chinese tradition. MCA Youth was very happy with this explanation. And we promised them that in future if ever brandish a keris in public again we will make sure it is made in China so as not to upset the Chinese. MCA Youth accepted this explanation and is very happy that we are sensitive to the feelings and sentiments of the Chinese.
MT: So if the keris is a Chinese weapon and not a Malay weapon, then what is a traditional Malay weapon?
YAB: Traditional Malay weapon? Maybe we don't have.....but now the Malay weapon is C4.
MT: Can we now talk about the recent Terengganu Monsoon Cup?
YAB: What about it?
MT: Well, isn’t the Monsoon Cup a failure?
YAB: Failure? No! Why do you say that?
MT: Well, the Monsoon Cup has never been held during the monsoon. The Monsoon Cup is held when we have clear skies and bright sunshine with no wind. So how can you organise a sailboat race when there are no monsoon winds? Isn’t this bad planning on the part of the organisers?
YAB: No! We planned it that way.
MT: You planned to hold the Monsoon Cup when there is no monsoon winds?
YAB: Of course. If we hold the Monsoon Cup during the monsoon, when it rains and is very windy, then there would also be floods. Who would want to go to Terengganu to witness the Monsoon Cup if it is raining and flooding? So we organise it when it is bright and sunny to make sure that the tourists would go to Terengganu.
MT: But then how can sailboats race if there is no wind?
YAB: That’s not important. What’s important is that tourists like the sun, so the Monsoon Cup must be held when we have clear and sunny skies.
MT: Alright, and over the two years the government has spent RM300 million a year to host the Monsoon Cup.
MT: Well, what is the benefit to the state?
YAB: It helps the local economy of course. Why would we spend RM300 million a year if it doesn’t help the locals?
MT: But what kind of spin-off does it bring the locals?
YAB: The locals benefit from tourism of course.
MT: In what way?
YAB: What do you mean?
MT: Well, how much is the spin-off.....how much do the tourists spend in Terengganu during those few days of the Monsoon Cup?
YAB: I don’t have the latest figures yet. But last year it was at least RM2 million. This year it could be slightly more.....maybe RM3 million.
MT: So over two years the government spent RM600 million on the Monsoon Cup but the benefit to the locals in terms of tourism is probably about RM5 million or less?
YAB: Something like that. But I told you I don’t have the latest figures yet.
MT: And how do you reckon that this is beneficial to the local people of Terengganu?
YAB: If the government did not spend that RM600 million then how could the locals earn this RM5 million?
MT: I don’t see the logic in the arithmetic. Wouldn’t it be better for the government to just give the locals the RM5 million? Then the country can save RM595 million.
YAB: Where did you learn economics? Are you an economist?
MT: No, I am not.
YAB: That's why you cannot seem to understand how the economy works.
MT: But in the first place doesn’t the money belong to the state?
YAB: Yes it does. That's why we are giving it back to the state.
MT: But the amount the state is supposed to earn is about RM1 billion a year. And under the Petroleum Development Act 1974, the State should be paid a Royalty of 5% on it oil revenue. So the RM1 billion a year should actually go to the state. But the state is not getting the money.
YAB: It is.
MT: But not directly.
YAB: No, not directly, indirectly.
MT: But the state is not able to decide how the money is spent since it has no control over the money.
MT: Then who decides.
YAB: My office decides, the Prime Minister’s Department.
MT: But how do you decide? What criteria do you use in deciding how the RM1 billion a year is spent?
YAB: We create RM1 billion worth of projects every year and make sure that all the money is spent within that same year and no money is carried forward to the following year.
MT: But how do you decide on what projects to create?
YAB: We total up all the project values and make sure it balances with the money that we have to spend for that year.
MT: Don’t you think that’s a waste of money? You are creating projects just so that you can spend the RM1 billion a year.
YAB: No it’s not. The development is for the people. All our development is for the people.
MT: But how can you say it’s for the people when we spend RM3 billion on a bridge to Penang and the contract is going to China? Then we spend more than RM1 billion on a sports complex in the UK and to donate money to a UK university. And we spend another few billion Ringgit to buy French submarines and Russian helicopters. None of this money is going to Malaysians.
YAB: That’s not true. We are also spending RM600 million to create contracts for Class F contractors.
MT: You mean the RM3 million to each of the 191 Umno divisions?
YAB: That’s right.
MT: Thank you very much, Datuk Seri, for agreeing to this exclusive interview.
YAB: No problem. Just make sure my name is not mentioned. You are an anti-government website so officially I cannot speak to you.
MT: No problem Datuk Seri. No one will know who you are. We shall protect your identity.
YAB: Thank you.
MT: Thank you Datuk Seri. It was a pleasure talking to you. It certainly clears up the perception the public may have in thinking that you do not know what you are doing. It is clear from your replies that you know exactly what you are doing.
YAB: Well, I always say I have my own ways of running this country. Just because I run the country differently from my predecessor.....you know who he is, I will not mention his name.....this does not mean that I don’t know what I’m doing. But make sure you write exactly what I say. Don’t twist what I have said. You Internet people always twist what we say to make us look bad.
MT: Don’t worry, Datuk Seri, I don’t need to twist anything you say to make you look bad.....if you know what I mean.