Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael
11.6K posts

Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده

@Constitution_94 He's nationally deployed remember? He serves a dual role. Besides that, his family is in Pretoria.
English

@zeusblxckthe1st It would be a bit naive for any man to claim such as theirs. Ngabe uzwana nezinyembezi
English

@AdvoBarryRoux Asking the head of a National Intervention Task Team what he's doing in Gauteng is a little strange.
English
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده

When Gabby finds out Victor only married her for the Latino vote
Filmgram@film_gramx
Desperate Housewives clips I still can't get over.
English
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده

Bro was fighting for his life just to get a snack... the ending is the ultimate payoff.
Elena@elenacute01
Bro was fighting for his life just to get a snack... the ending is the ultimate payoff.
English
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده

The public controversy surrounding Ghanaian 🇬🇭 businessman Ibrahim Mahama’s pledge of 100 jobs for citizens evacuated from South Africa 🇿🇦 continues to ignite intense political and ethical debates.
While the government celebrates the initiative as a model partnership with the Association of Ghana Industries, critics see a darker narrative. Because Ibrahim Mahama is the brother of President John Mahama, the job offer from his company, Engineers & Planners, has amplified deep-seated allegations of nepotism and state capture.
Opponents argue that the Mahama administration is using regulatory shifts, particularly in the gold mining sector, to enrich family-linked corporations under the guise of philanthropy. Tying these jobs to the controversial transfer of mining concessions like the Damang Mine from foreign firms has raised alarms about investor confidence.
Furthermore, everyday citizens question the equity of the intervention, asking why such urgent corporate lifelines are not equally extended to the millions of local youth battling systemic unemployment.
Ultimately, this saga transcends mere charity. It forces us to ask a critical question: when billionaire philanthropy is deeply intertwined with presidential power, does it serve the public good, or does it simply institutionalise cronyism?
English
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده
Dani Ishmael أُعيد تغريده























