Is Peruvian Airlines the first casualty of Humala's nationalization plans?

Peruvian Airlines: suspension is baseless

from Peru This Week

================================

 PNE Opinion:

This is a back door attempt to begin the nationalization of air travel in Perú. A 90 day suspension for Peruvian Airlines could put them out of business or at least set the course for that to happen in the near future. These Humala knot-heads didn’t learn the lessons of 1999, when the national airline Aero Peru went bankrupt? It not only went bankrupt but had a constant string of maintenance, safety and customer services issues. National airlines around the world have similar results. From swearing in on the out-of-force 1979 constitution, to stopping the eradication program of the illegal crops of coca growers, to every socialist program he favors, to creating a national airline, Humala has given every indication that he is a big step backward to past failures. Considering the economy of the world in these times, that is a particularly ignorant strategy right now. I'm still waiting to hear an original thought from this president.

====================

Peru: an airline at all losses

What is it about airlines? Like football teams, they can be trophy investments, holding a value beyond their balance sheet.

Despite all the woes in the global airline sector, Ollanta Humala, Peru’s new president, wants to create a national carrier with the participation of private investors.

Then there is budget carrier Peruvian Airlines, which has increased its share of six local routes rapidly since it launched in 2007. Mr Humala’s administration suspended Peruvian Airlines’ operations on Thursday for 90 days for not meeting safety standards, leaving hundreds of passengers to find seats with Star or Taca (tickets will be reassigned subject to availability, as long as they offer the same routes at no extra cost).

================

Aero Perú had suffered two fatal events, Flight 772 near Juliaca in 1988, and Flight 603 in 1996. The second incident contributed to the airline's demise. Before the take-off of Flight 603, the maintenance crew erroneously left masking tape over the sensitive static ports of the plane. The crew thus received contradicting and false flight data, particularly from the altimeter, after take-off. This prevented even ground radar from successfully assisting the flight crew during the emergency, and ultimately led to the plane's crash into the Pacific Ocean on October 2, 1996. This was a severe loss to the airline, from which it could never recover.


After the accident, Aeroperú changed the number of its evening Miami-Lima-Santiago Boeing 757 service to Flight 691. The Flight 603 incident contributed to the eventual demise of Aeroperú, which was already plagued with financial and management difficulties. The airline folded in 1999.

Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.

Humala in Hiding

 Peru's Humala unveils new governing style: silence
(Reuters) Two weeks into his five-year term, Peru's President Ollanta Humala has retreated from the public spotlight, showing an odd reluctance to discuss policies, scandals or even his plans for running the country.

=========================== 

PNE Opinion:

Humala, all campaign talk? The campaigner with no plan on how to fulfill the absurd promises he made? That would be my guess for a man who has an empty leadership and accomplishment résumé. Please ask yourself what has Humala ever done? Be in the military? Be a failed coup leader against democracy? Be retired? His only public display so far as president is to backtrack on his promise to accept the standing 1993 Peruvian Constitution and not to try to change it. Now he doesn’t want the press to be given access to him nor his governing plans? Nor his cabinet!? Humala is not and never was qualified by any measurable standard to be president of Perú. I think we may be  seeing the first signs of big trouble ahead. Of course those signs were visible during Humala’s campaign. But now we have the real deal. And, that is even more frightening.  “No comment and no access” is not an acceptable stance for democratic leadership. Humala promised transparency. Hmmm… Where have I heard that one before!!! 

Nice that Humala cowers and escapes media scrutiny while Constitutional Law Professor and Congresswoman Martha Chávez (who courageously and rightfully defended the democracy of the Peruvian people by calling Humala out, for swapping the constitutions, during his inauguration and lost her congressional seat for 120 days at Humala’s hands because of it) faces up to the press and shows that she is a substantial, intelligent and confident woman to be admired. Punto Final scumbag Nicolás Lúcar sent his attack “perra” Julianna Oxenford to berate and excoriate Martha Chávez in the guise of an interview that turnout to be nothing more than a third rate verbal attack. La perra Julianna Oxenford’s interruptive, aggressive and interrogative behavior, along with scoffing laugher and ill-manners, complete with hand gestures normally reserved for scolding small children was over-the-top brutishness. She even insinuates that Martha is mentally unstable when it is obvious that la perra Julianna may be the one who needs psychoanalysis. Punto Final even used the black and white video technique normally reserved for criminal interviews.

Not surprisingly Martha showed Julianna to be the pathetic Humala sympathizer and apologist that she is. Martha calmly and agilely with grace shut that perra Julianna Oxenford down at every turn. The ambush concluded with Martha gracefully telling the perra Julianna Oxenford, that if she wanted a debate, she would be happy to debate her. But she should have been honest and ethical enough to ask for that.

After the so-called interview the lowlife Nicolás Lúcar had the stupidity and arrogance to say that Martha Chávez had made Perú look like savages to the world. Nicolás Lúcar you are still the dishonest lying Humala supporter you were through his entire campaign. Stop presenting yourself as an objective journalist and declare your political partiality before making your asinine commentary! You are definitely a media, Third World monkey. And so is anyone who would pull a moronic stunt like swapping the "old" out of force Peruvian constitution for the actual in force Peruvian constitution during a televised presidential inaugural event without pre-announcing any intention to do so. That is a slap in the face of the democratic process and the citizens of Perú. Nicolás Lúcar thinks Martha Chávez makes Perú look like savages to the World? Are you kidding me!?

Ollanta Humala

Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.

Ozzie Guillen Challenges Sean Penn to Move to Venezuela

Okay, this is not about Perú, but it is about Hugo Chavez. A man President Humala admires. And it calls attention to the hypocrisy of these activist lamebrain elitist liberals. Move to Venezuela for two years Sean Penn, if you don't mind being shot at! :-)

 Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.

Suspension of Free Speech

Martha Chávez: Courageous and Correct

================

PNE Opinion:

It appears the suspension of democracy and inequality of justice are already surfacing and readily accepted by the Humala Administration as business as usual. Congressperson Martha Chávez has been discordantly suspended for 120 days because she dare protest the unannounced switching of the old 1979 constitution (which has no protection of private property rights), for the 1993 constitution currently in force, during Huamla’s inauguration. This from Humala who swore on a Bible and in writing during his campaign that he would not change the current constitution.

Humala's first vice-president Marisol Espinoza (the one who talks out of the side of her mouth), on Primera Noticia TV news this morning, actually justified Humala’s position by saying that unequal application of laws is in every administration. She said this while explaining why congressperson Martha Chávez was harshly and inexplicably suspended for 120 days. While Alexis Humala (Ollanta’s brother) was investigated in closed door meetings in which the findings of the so called investigation will not be publicly disclosed. Then he was simply allowed to apologize for taking a secret trip to Russia and allegedly presenting himself as representative of his brother’s government in energy dealings with the Russian Government. When questioned about this inequity, by Álvarez Rodrich of Primer Noticia, first vice-president Marisol Espinoza said it was common for the party in power to discriminate in favor of their side. When reminded that no such discrimination occurred during the previous administration she had no answer.

Humala deliberately and boorishly created the classless cheap shot  “conflict of the constitutions” during his inauguration, challenged by constitutional lawyer and congressperson Martha Chávez, by not prudently and democratically presenting this change in the swearing in ceremony to congressional officials before the inauguration. Thereby allowing for input and debate before the ceremony took place.

In my estimation a gracious democratic leader would reject such harsh punishment of a sitting congressperson for simply protesting verbally a controversy purposely created to evoke such a reaction. I suppose it should have been obvious that this president does not fully comprehend freedom of speech when during his campaign he swore he would restore free speech rights that were never missing during Garcia’s presidency. They were never missing until now! A disturbing beginning.

For me it is personal insights like this into Humala’s thinking, telling much more than gratuitous appointments to appease the stock markets, that show how future policies decisions will be made. Indecorous presidents are not only annoyingly worrisome but dangerous.  

=============

Afterthought:

Don’t you think a new president taking office would have more meaningful issues and concerns, that are impacting the daily lives of people, rather than the distraction of the inconsequential and provocative juvenile stunt of swearing in on an out of force constitution, that is inferior in so many ways to the current in force constitution? It just strikes me as stunningly undignified, ignorant and ill-mannered. As were the behaviors and actions of the vice-presidents at the inaugural ceremony. It’s all so petty and extremely disappointing comportment from people at this high level of government. 

Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.

Hugo Chavez Workout Video

Should Richard Simmons be worried?

Oh! My! Sweaty Men!

Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.

Humala evokes the 1979 military constitution in his oath

Off to a radical start.

Humala evokes the 1979 military constitution in his oath. Lima-Ollanta Humala, a leftist roots retired military, on Thursday became the new president of Peru, a country that boasts one of the highest growth rates in the world but still carries a large social deficit.Humala ruled Peru for the next five years after swearing before Congress with Bible in hand and before the eyes of 10 Latin American presidents and the Prince of Spain.During his oath, Humala evoked the 1979 Constitution of a military government, not the current 1993 as amended by former President Alberto Fujimori.This provoked a strong protest Fujimori legislators shouting "Let him go" just minutes after he placed the presidential sash.The new president, which dramatically slowed their nationalist ideas throughout the campaign that led to the presidency, succeeds Alan Garcia, who completed his second term after having ruled Peru between 1985 and 1990.

English Translation of Humala’s Inauguration Speech

In a public declaration signed a few weeks before the second round, Humala promised to respect the constitution and freedom of the press. Both the ministers of defense and the interior will be civilians. He will defend the separation of powers. His main thrust will be policies with sustained growth and inclusion: economic, social, ethnic, geographic and cultural, especially of the most poor. In this thrust he will have the support of Toledo who had made the redistribution of the benefits a key part of his program.

====================

Consider Humala's promise on the inaugural dais to abide by the national constitution—not the current one, but the prior version, drafted in 1979. The reference was a swipe at the 1993 charter written during the tenure of AlbertoFujimori, the divisive dictator who closed congress and ruled with an iron hand.Humala has a point. Though drafted by legislators and approved by a national referendum, the current constitution was heavily influenced by Fujimori. (His opponents boycotted the election of the constituent assembly that wrote the charter). But it also sanctioned economic liberties—privatization and rolling back state interference in the market—that untethered the economy and transformed Peru from a chronically dysfunctional nation into a model for Latin America.The result has been the most spectacular jag of growth in the region. Surfing the commodities boom, Peru's economy has expanded for the last 12 consecutive years, with low inflation and nearly $47 billion in international reserves. With jobs in mining and construction on the rise and better social spending, the number of Peruvians living in poverty has dropped from nearly half to 31percent, in a decade. And another $42 billion in foreign investments are reckoned to be in the works in mining alone.
 

=========================

PNE Opinion:

Humala signed a promise not to change the constitution. So why the deliberate and unnecessary agitation? Unless he plans on breaking that promise. Humala also outlined a socialist redistribution plan that will definitely hurt small businesses, infrastructure projects and lose jobs. Humala's plan would make even Barack Obama blush. Seems Humala is interested in starting a political war and economic upheaval rather than governing through constitutional incremental change. Although, I must admit, the stick in the eye approach to governing would seem appropriate for a man of Humala’s limited abilities.

And the condescending and dismissive treatment, by the TV news creeps (Nicolás Lúcar, etc.), of Congresswoman Martha Chavez came off as astoundingly chauvinistic. I guess Perú media has not moved past adolescence. They still have a lot of pimples!


Looks like we are off to a radical start. Pray for us!

Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.

Alejandro Toledo: "Without us, Humala cannot do anything."

Alejandro Toledo: "Without us, Humala cannot do anything." Toledo visibly angry with Humala’s rejection, blames other’s (not himself) for his miserable failure to attract voters. Toledo defiles the honorable and amicable PPK with the label of “traitor.” Toledo was used and made a fool and now he is throwing a tantrum illustrative of his boorish manner and mentality. It is a shame to see a divide develop between these two “anything to win” egomaniacs, because Toledo and Humala deserve each other.

Nicolás Lúcar picking winners on Punto Final?

Why would a person lacking integrity who makes a pact with another person lacking integrity expect that pact to be fulfilled with integrity? Narcissistically fueled stupidity perhaps? Neither Humala nor Toledo have remained true to their original representations or principle beliefs. Humala, for pure political gain, changed campaign positions more than the deceptive chameleon changes colors. And Toledo (whom Humala said should be overthrown for being anti-democratic), for pure political gain, backed away from every dire warning he espoused about the extreme dangers of a Humala presidency. Liars expecting liars to keep promises is always horrifyingly amusing when it pertains to people who can make life altering decisions for millions.

These two ethically challenged men teamed up to defeat the honest, consistent, coherent and intelligent campaign message of Keiko Fujimori and class-act supporters Luis Castañeda and Pedro Pablo Kuczynski. It ended up a case of two conniving, despicable and coreless personalities winning the votes of the gullible and ignorant to defeat quality leadership appealing to the intelligent and informed percentage of Perú’s population. Now we have a president-elect who even the most optimistic observers say, “We must wait and see how he governs.” This rather than a president-elect that would have immediately moved the economy forward with the doubtless confidence and support of the producers of Perú’s recent and fabulous economic advancement and poverty reducing success story. A disappointing situation indeed.

But to somehow act surprised or indignant, at the acrimonious dealings between two scoundrels, as (unproclaimed Humala supporter) Nicolás Lúcar did in his highly prejudiced presentation on the Punto Final broadcast last night (July 24, 2011), is laughing in the face ludicrous. Nicolás Lúcar frame this back-stabling political dust-up as purely Toledo’s ill-mannered and unrealistic expectations of Humala. He did this without the slightest mention that Humala used Toledo (whose campaign plan was completely at odds with his own) on the campaign trail and stage to disingenuously siphon off Toledo’s voters with promises of political inclusion and influence. That's why Toledo is understandably angry about Humala's now dismissive attitude toward Toledo's "Perú Posible" party. I certainly have no problem with choosing sides, but I have a large disdain for ideological partisans presenting themselves as unbiased journalists. Maybe in the end Ollanta Humala will turnout to be okay, but I don’t think playing Russian Roulette with Perú’s future is the optimal choice. 

OPINION BY PNE

Also read related post, "Strange Bedfellows Indeed"

Comments posted here may be copied to the Peru-N-English Discussion Group site.