Coco Mademoiselle: The Film - CHANEL

Other videos

to watch

Domestic Abuse Exposed | Assaulted Womens Helpline

My Top 5 Izzie and Denny Moments from Greys Anatomy

Pieter Oosthuizen Dance

Comments

what people think about it

Solly

Solly

I and I...''one good thing about music is that when it hits you , you feel no pain''

06/11/2015

Cecilia Matongo Busisinyani

Cecilia Matongo Busisinyani

Dudzai ndiye ane yese chanel mademoiselle

31/10/2017

Blessed Ndiweni

Blessed Ndiweni

oh my word have never laughed this much in a long time, madam boss chiiko?

30/10/2017

Esnath Kembo

Esnath Kembo

Hahaha madam boss ka.Sekuru Kira vane katumbu zenene. chanel

29/10/2017

Kelvin Itayi Mukoyi

Kelvin Itayi Mukoyi

Dudzai ma1 akapenga shoo

29/10/2017

Ian

Ian

Remember the R1 billion budget for the 2016 ANC's election? And a little something for the facilitators too.

29/10/2017

robmanzoni

robmanzoni

As Billy Joel puts it: "Honesty is such a lonely word..."

26/10/2017

Ross Gordon

Ross Gordon

Agreed when the water becomes too hot, just move them somewhere else. The next Oil minister publicly announced that what Joe had said was no the truth. I wondered at that, was it inexperience or just plain honesty, in the world of the ANC today, honesty is such a rare commodity.

24/10/2017

Summbagg

Summbagg

All the dots seem to line up to confirm that. The numbers even seem to match up.

24/10/2017

David_de_Jong

David_de_Jong

I was wondering if Glencore's inclusion was to cover the discount they sold Optimum at.

24/10/2017

Peter Rossfour

Peter Rossfour

"FALSE FACE MUST HIDE WHAT THE FALSE HEART DOTH KNOW." Macbeth 1:7 William Shakespeare (1564-1616) English dramatist and poet. The above quote is the last line of the first act of Macbeth. It relates to the scene where Lady Macbeth and her husband resolves to kill King Duncan and take over his throne. To keep their intentions secret they would hide their true but false intentions with a false face to the king. Former minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson.is the epitome of Lady Macbeth. Her blatant lies whilst the Minister of Energy was meant to obfuscate her deplorable actions and hide it from the public. When in May 2016, Business Day’s Carol Paton broke the story of the secret sale of South Africa’s strategic crude oil reserves, about 10‑million barrels’ worth, at a rock-bottom price, this despicable woman and the chief executive of the Central Energy Fund, of which the Strategic Fuel Fund is a part, vociferously claimed it was simply a matter of “stock rotation”. The energy fund would be able to buy back the oil at any time. A more blatant lie is hard to imagine. What must be remembered is that this illegal transaction took place at the time Brent crude oil's price was in the range of $37 to $45 a barrel. What smells so rotten it screams for attention is that the Strategic Fuel Fund saw fit to sell 10‑million barrels of our much needed fuel reserves in a “closed tender” to energy traders Taleveras, Glencore and Vitol at $28 a barrel!!!!! This "brave" act of the Minister left South Africa with less than a day’s worth of oil reserves, calculated at about 300 000 barrels. Taking in mind we use about 450 000 barrels’ worth a day, in reality it left us crippled. God forbid we suddenly have a National emergency and we urgently have to buy millions of barrels. As sure as hell we won't buy it near $28 a barrel! If Alec is correct that Zuma's latest Cabinet reshuffle is to try and hide the finer details of the Oilgate scandal, the only thing they can cover up is who precisely shared in the billions generated from the sale. And if that is the case, and the Laughing Hyena initiated the reshuffle, then one must wonder just how many of the billions found their merry way into the coffers of the Gupta's and the Zuma clan. Unfortunately, I don't share Alec's enthusiasm for December to roll on. Methinks we're going to see and experience a whole truckload of Zuma shenanigans, no matter how detrimental to the economy, the people, and the country, before the much-anticipated ANC Elective Conference gets off the ground. Fasten your seat-belts., Folks, there's severe turbulence ahead. Oh, and by the way, tighten your own belts as well, with what Gigaba and co. have in mind for us, you'd be wise to cut a few extra notches in your belt. AISCH!!!!!!!!!!!

24/10/2017

Tami Calliope

Tami Calliope

Mr. Wallace's acute awareness of his luck and his gratitude for it gave me almost as much joy as the exquisite portraits of this beautiful Pangolin, the most endangered mammal on the planet. I shared this article with its photos to my Facebook page, which is entirely dedicated to the threatened animals of Africa. My thanks to Mr. Wallace, who so kindly shared his moments of grace with the rest of us.

27/10/2017

Null hypothesis

Null hypothesis

If you do have a hotline to this president, can you ask him to behave like one please? SA seems to be surviving in spite of him, not because of him.

01/11/2017

uShaka

uShaka

mademoiselle Are you suggesting that judges can be bribed? Wow, cool. I was wondering why DA run to court, always.

01/11/2017

uShaka

uShaka

Possibly that's how the farm murderers feel before they commit the act.

01/11/2017

AD

AD

Game over

01/11/2017

AlienUndercover

AlienUndercover

The puppet show goes on...the main culprit hand picked his judges and the jury...this happens only in SA....

31/10/2017

maxie

maxie

All sound like a very very bad dream. Will be nice to wake up and aaah!!, was not so bad for SA.

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

i suggest you read the entire constitution not just chapter 9 and irrespective of what the public protector says the constitution rules supreme. Chapter 5 84. Powers and functions of President 2.The President is responsible for f. appointing commissions of inquiry;

31/10/2017

Romeo Siera

Romeo Siera

Hopefully someone can give us some explanation on this. 1) The PP acted correctly by stating the President must appoint the commision of inquiry. (As prescribed in the constitution) 2) The constitution do not prescribe how the president appoint the commision of inquiry. The PP is thus saying the President must appoint the commision of inquiry but she is prescribing how he does this.

31/10/2017

Do the right thing

Do the right thing

So this holeass wants to hold SA ransom again throw his ssa in jail,after reading the book, the scorpions need to be resurrected and prosecute everyone from public protector to ministers

31/10/2017

Dr W

Dr W

And NOT PAYING HIS INCOME TAX. 🖕🏾🖕🏾🖕🏾

31/10/2017

Dr W

Dr W

Faith is the girl next door. 😡😡

31/10/2017

Ani MalFarm

Ani MalFarm

The two are not that different, and look like both sides of the same (lowly) approach..

31/10/2017

My_opinion247

My_opinion247

Hmmm I didn't think of it from that angle. You could be onto something

31/10/2017

Ani MalFarm

Ani MalFarm

... or like bargaining with the court - maybe a sign that he might be losing leverage?

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

I have no idea what you are on about and by looks of it neither do you. No one said the PP cant investigate and provide remedial action, however that remedial action as to be inline with the constitution, her remedial action where she takes a presidential power and invests it in the judiciary is not inline with the Constitution , presidential powers and the separation of powers between state and judiciary

31/10/2017

Kalamazoo

Kalamazoo

Good night.

31/10/2017

2homini.lupus.est

2homini.lupus.est

…mutt-am-bee ???

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

The law of separation of powers and presidential powers needs no interpretation eve the mentioned this in numerous of his speeches.

31/10/2017

2homini.lupus.est

2homini.lupus.est

….mmmm….what makes you suspect it might be a (non-white)mail (just to not be a reyzist)…...

31/10/2017

My_opinion247

My_opinion247

In response to your last para - NO

31/10/2017

My_opinion247

My_opinion247

Sounds like blackmail - a game he appears to excel in

31/10/2017

Kalamazoo

Kalamazoo

Thuli's recommendation was that the President appoint a commission of enquiry, to be presided over by a judge (one name only) who will be recommended by the CJ. All courts, including the Concourt, do not "bend" or "change" the Constitution as they deem fit. They interpret the law. Even if this matter is served before the Concourt, the same rules of interpretation will apply.

31/10/2017

Coenraad De Buys

Coenraad De Buys

He has good faith: Faith Muthambi

31/10/2017

Rob Charlton

Rob Charlton

He has already demonstrated that he does not act “in good faith”, so why or how could a court be convinced by this ?

31/10/2017

v_3

v_3

it would be fascinating to know what the terms of reference would be... Rupert WMC Foreign agents Regime change Penny Sparrow Media ownership & control (excluding SABC, Guptanews and Iqbal's Odious Lies [IOL]) Plots Western Cape Rebel ZANC MPs in the MONC Gordhan Conspiracies

31/10/2017

disqus_OW7Gq3OfV8

disqus_OW7Gq3OfV8

What is faith in Zuma's terms? He shows no faith, no ethics and no morals, only selfishness and arrogance!

31/10/2017

disqus_OW7Gq3OfV8

disqus_OW7Gq3OfV8

We have no protection whatsoever from the powers of politicians if the findings of Chapter 9 institutions are dismissed by them at will. This amounts to dictatorship of the worst kind. Who gave the President and his dependent and benefiting politicians the powers to ignore constitution at will? Who gave them the powers to serve themselves as pleased? Some of our democratically elected leaders must be in the opinion that they are managing a 'self-service' shop! Is there any ethic - is there any moral left in them? Is there any sense of responsibility and accountability left? How poor was their upbringing to become as they are?

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

no one imagined 23 years ago when the constitution was drafted that Zupta will become president

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

Any recommendations made which is not in line with the constitution will be illegal and hence not binding.. If the current public protect reported and gave a remedial action as (The president must kill all the DA members) such remedial action does not fall with in the constitution and hence not binding. In accordance to powers and separation thereof only the president as that call to appoint a judicial commission when asked

31/10/2017

Abraham Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln

The thief has the power to decide if the theft should be investigated.......hmmmm??!!??

31/10/2017

Penellope Jones

Penellope Jones

In other words his in control now of the investigation . . . . . . . . . SUddenly today after the Jacques Pauw book with the revelations . . . . . . . .

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

Its is same as Zupta saying he can recuse himself and let the top appoint the judge

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

First the only person who can appoint a judicial commission is the President in lines with the constitution(Zupta). Second to that is No Court is above the constitution and no court or person can change the constitution. The constitutional court can interrupt the constitution and at times recommend and advise on changes on the constitution. So while other courts can hear and advise on the constitution no court can change or bend the constitution as they deem fit. And in that terms it will end up in constitutional court either by appeal or by direction of the high court judge

31/10/2017

David

David

The PP is a ZUPTA. The courts have to be firm in maintaining the integrity of Thuli's report. If Wanted #1 gets involved it will be a case of "Here we go again"

31/10/2017

Scurram

Scurram

So he'll play along only if by his terms? Okay so if i should go to court, i'll tell the judge that i am willing to be tried, but only if exhibit 'A' and 'B' and maybe 'C' is not used as evidence (most incriminating) against me. What do you think the judge will say to me? Or are the rules different for our 'loving' mr President?

31/10/2017

Nomakanjane

Nomakanjane

One upon a time a gentlemen called ngconde balfour was a member of the executive and once invited chihuahuas to hitch a life a life. Wish the gent was still around

31/10/2017

Peter O

Peter O

The conflict of interests will come with teflon jakes apoointing a judge who will investigate him (we all saw how well that worked out with the arms deal inquiry and judge seriti) I dont think concourt will have a conflict of interests if they appoint a judge in a matter not involving them. The only conflict of interests is when they have to decide on whether they can hear the matter as it is about the CJ appointing the judge. The CJ could recuse himself in the matter and that would solve it. I also believe the kompetanz kompetanz doctrine could apply

31/10/2017

Peter O

Peter O

I glanced at the headline quickly and saw Zuma commits suicide. Ah well

31/10/2017

Tania

Tania

Big Criminal Liar.

31/10/2017

Kalamazoo

Kalamazoo

The Concourt is not the only forum that can hear and decide on a constitutional matter. Such a matter is currently before the Pretoria High Court and its judgment will be delivered before the end of this court term. Since you suggest that the Concourt is conflicted in this matter, why do you even bring them into the equation?

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

Well as mentioned in my first comment the only court can rule on a constitutional power is the concourt and in that the concourt is conflicted in ruling in a power allocated to the president and moving it to them and hence it becomes the office of the CJ versus the office of the president

31/10/2017

Guptastan

Guptastan

I see the same outcome as the weapon transaction! Proof was there and it just got dumped in a container. Only difference now is that the FBI and Brits are chasing the money trails of state capture transactions. Gigabyte won't get any monatery support from the world bank if they don't prosecute the guilty parties.

31/10/2017

Kalamazoo

Kalamazoo

The only recourse is to uphold the recommendations of Thuli. I never mentioned a word about the Concourt. The Concourt cannot "self-empower" themselves. The Constitution does that. This is not about the Office of the CJ or Zuma. It is about the law and its interpretation

31/10/2017

The Jigg

The Jigg

Knowing what we do about this putrid excuse for a man, I can only assume the Public Protector is as crooked as he is. Why else would he select her as the overseer of the investigation into his own guilt unless he felt he had a reasonable chance of success! With much of the dirty laundry already out in the open, a condition like this seems to serve only to save his own skin.

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

Zupta in this case followed the correct recourse and challenged it in court. Your very argument is the reason which makes the remedial action flawed , you argue that the president can not appoint the judge in the commission , in the same breath you will want the Concourt to self empower themselves when the crux of the situation is the (Office of the CJ versus the Office of Zupta). And before you ask me there is no correct recourse to achieve what we want while zupta is still president.

31/10/2017

Ren A

Ren A

The CJ will do a great job. (I was referring to all the other swept-under-the-carpet scandals. There's so many we just can't keep up).

31/10/2017

Kalamazoo

Kalamazoo

I understand your point very clearly. Remember, the President had 18 months to do so, but did not. Madonsela's report is signed and sealed so no one may tamper with it, including her remedial action. Bottom line is that the President cannot appoint a judge in a case where he is the subject of the enquiry.

31/10/2017

Guptastan

Guptastan

Teflon Jacob at his best.

31/10/2017

Ethan

Ethan

possibly only way for us to rid ourselves of him

31/10/2017

Legends

Legends

A presidential state funeral is well overdue.

31/10/2017