Beyonce's Dress Rips Up the Backside: See How She Recovered from the Major Wardrobe Malfunction!

CULLED FROM YAHOO.COM

Call the fashion police!

Tom Ford presented his Autumn/Winter 2015 womenswear collection at Milk Studios in Los Angeles on Feb. 20, but unfortunately there was more drama going on behind the scenes than on the designer's runway. A-listers including Gwyneth Paltrow, Amy Adams, and Reese Witherspoon packed into the pre-Oscar event, but one seat in particular was still empty by the time the venue's house lights went dim — Beyonce's! 

"Beyonce had a huge wardrobe malfunction at the show," a source told Us Weekly. "Her dress ripped all the way up the back and she had to run backstage to find something else to wear."

The usual run of a fashion show is less than five minutes, so the "7/11" singer, 33, missed all the action and a prime photo op in Ford's new duds. "The people back there couldn't get it fixed in time, so she had to miss the show," the source revealed. "Beyonce was so embarrassed, [but] she was really cool about it."

Mrs. Carter changed into a long black crystal mosaic dress from the Spring 2014 collection, per a release sent out by the brand the next day, Feb. 21.

Afterwards, the Carters were photographed together — Jay Z in a black suit and Beyonce in her plan-B look. "Her dress ripped on the way there and she snuck backstage and was given that black dress to change into," the source said. "She was the latest person to the show and only caught the last few minutes of it."


Beyonce had a less dramatic night in her long white Marni dress during the Vanity Fair Oscar 2015 afterparty on Sunday, Feb. 22. Queen Bey danced the night away with her younger sister Solange and Jennifer Lopez.

A Tom Ford spokesperson had no comment.

Valentine From The Dead! - Story Of A Man Who Sent A Gift From The Dead!

Wyoming Woman Stunned by Gift From Husband Who Died Last Year

A Wyoming woman who lost her husband of 28 years to brain cancer last year was shocked to receive a special gift from him this Valentine's Day.

Shelly and Jim Golay of Casper, Wyoming, met at church in 1984. They had a "fairy tale romance" and even went to Disneyland in California for their honeymoon, Shelly Golay told ABC News today.

Her husband was "very much a family man," Golay, 52, said, adding that they have two children, now 27 and 25.
 

"Jim was just an amazing man. Everybody that ever met him loved him. He was always just my rock. And the whole family's rock. And he just had this unwavering faith that was just inspiring. Always had a positive attitude," Golay added.

Jim was diagnosed with brain cancer on Easter 2012.

"Had a strength that was just contagious. He was tough as nails," Golay said. "When he went through his chemo, he didn't look like a chemo patient, didn't act like a chemo patient."

In February 2014, they learned the cancer was inoperable. Jim was given four months to live and he died in June 2014 at age 53.

"They usually give you 12 months to live and he lived 26 months," Golay said. "That was just a blessing."

This Valentine's Day, eight months after Jim's death, Golay says she received flowers with a card that read, "Happy Valentine's Day Honey. Stay Strong! Yours Forever Love Jim."

"My first thought was my kids gave it to me," Golay said.

 But when she asked her son and daughter, they both denied sending the gift.

Golay spoke with a co-worker, who suggested the flowers may have been from Jim. When Golay looked on the back of the card, she found her husband's cellphone number. "That was very emotional," she said. "I knew it was him."

"I went back to my son and said, 'You have to call the flower shop and confirm Dad sent these. I'm too emotional.' Sure enough, he had come in that last Valentine's Day and had said, 'Just send her flowers for the rest of her life.'"

Their daughter, Ashley Wisroth, was at the grocery store when she found out who the flowers were from, and "just started bawling," she told ABC News today.

"I was so excited to know he had done something so sweet. It was just like my dad to do something like that. At the same time, it was bittersweet, because we knew in order for him to set something like that up, he must have known at one point he wasn't going to make it."

Golay said the flowers "means to me that his love never ends."

"He set up such an amazing gift for me to receive that," Golay said. "That act of love to me is just true love in its purest form."

Culled from www.yahoo.com

https://gma.yahoo.com/wyoming-woman-stunned-gift-husband-died-last-162513550--abc-news-sex.html

Chimamanda's Controversial Democracy Deferred

In a piece titled "Democracy, Deferred", award winning
author, Chimamanda Adichie described the recent
postponement of the general elections as an act of
desperation from an incumbent terrified of losing. Below is
the article published on The Atlantic ...
Last week, Victor, a carpenter, came to my Lagos
home to fix a broken chair. I asked him whom he
preferred as Nigeria’s next president: the incumbent,
Goodluck Jonathan, or his challenger, Muhammadu
Buhari. "I don’t have a voter’s card, but if I did, I
would vote for somebody I don’t like,” he said. 'I don’t
like Buhari but Jonathan is not performing.”
Victor sounded like many people I know: utterly
unenthusiastic about the two major candidates in our
upcoming election.
Were Nigerians to vote on likeability alone, Jonathan would
win. He is mild-mannered and genially unsophisticated, with
a conventional sense of humor. Buhari has a severe,
ascetic air about him, a rigid uprightness; it is easy to
imagine him in 1984, leading a military government whose
soldiers routinely beat up civil servants. Neither candidate
is articulate. Jonathan is given to rambling; his unscripted
speeches leave listeners vaguely confused. Buhari is thick-
tongued, his words difficult to decipher. In public
appearances, he seems uncomfortable not only with the
melodrama of campaigning but also with the very idea of it.
To be a democratic candidate is to implore and persuade,
and his demeanor suggests a man who is not at ease with
amiable consensus. Still, he is no stranger to campaigns.
This is his third run as a presidential candidate; the last
time, in 2011, he lost to Jonathan.
This time, Buhari’s prospects are better. Jonathan is widely
perceived as ineffectual, and the clearest example, which
has eclipsed his entire presidency, is his response to Boko
Haram. Such a barbaric Islamist insurgency would
challenge any government. But while Boko Haram bombed
and butchered, Jonathan seemed frozen in a confused,
tone-deaf inaction. Conflicting stories emerged of an ill-
equipped army, of a corrupt military leadership, of northern
elites sponsoring Boko Haram, and even of the government
itself sponsoring Boko Haram.
Jonathan floated to power, unprepared, on a serendipitous
cloud. He was a deputy governor of Bayelsa state who
became governor when his corrupt boss was forced to quit.
Chosen as vice president because powerbrokers considered
him the most harmless option from southern Nigeria, he
became president when his northern boss died in office.
Nigerians gave him their goodwill—he seemed refreshingly
unassuming—but there were powerful forces who wanted
him out, largely because he was a southerner, and it was
supposed to be the north’s ‘turn’ to occupy the presidential
office.
And so the provincial outsider suddenly thrust onto the
throne, blinking in the chaotic glare of competing interests,
surrounded by a small band of sycophants, startled by the
hostility of his traducers, became paranoid. He was slow to
act, distrustful and diffident. His mildness came across as
cluelessness. His response to criticism calcified to a single
theme: His enemies were out to get him. When the Chibok
girls were kidnapped, he and his team seemed at first to
believe that it was a fraud organized by his enemies to
embarrass him. His politics of defensiveness made it
difficult to sell his genuine successes, such as his focus on
the long-neglected agricultural sector and infrastructure
projects. His spokespeople alleged endless conspiracy
theories, compared him to Jesus Christ, and generally kept
him entombed in his own sense of victimhood.
The delusions of Buhari’s spokespeople are better
packaged, and obviously free of incumbency’s crippling
weight. They blame Jonathan for everything that is wrong
with Nigeria, even the most multifarious, ancient knots.
They dismiss references to Buhari’s past military
leadership, and couch their willful refusal in the language of
‘change,’ as though Buhari, by representing change from
Jonathan, has also taken on an ahistorical saintliness.
I remember the Buhari years as a blur of bleakness. I
remember my mother bringing home sad rations of tinned
milk, otherwise known as “essential commodities”—the
consequences of Buhari’s economic policy. I remember air
thick with fear, civil servants made to do frog jumps for
being late to work, journalists imprisoned, Nigerians flogged
for not standing in line, a political vision that cast citizens
as recalcitrant beasts to be whipped into shape.
Buhari’s greatest source of appeal is that he is widely
perceived as non-corrupt. Nigerians have been told how
little money he has, how spare his lifestyle is. But to sell the
idea of an incorruptible candidate who will fight corruption
is to rely on the disingenuous trope that Buhari is not his
party. Like Jonathan’s People’s Democratic Party, Buhari’s
All Progressives Congress is stained with corruption, and its
patrons have a checkered history of exploitative
participation in governance. Buhari’s team is counting on
the strength of his perceived personal integrity: his image
as a good guy forced by realpolitik to hold hands with the
bad guys, who will be shaken off after his victory.
In my ancestral home state of Anambra, where Jonathan is
generally liked, the stronger force at play is a distrust of
Buhari, partly borne of memories of his military rule, and
partly borne of his reputation, among some Christians, as a
Muslim fundamentalist. When I asked a relative whom she
would vote for, she said, “Jonathan of course. Am I crazy
to vote for Buhari so that Nigeria will become a sharia
country?”
Nigeria has predictable voting patterns, as all democratic
countries do. Buhari can expect support from large swaths
of the core north, and Jonathan from southern states.
Region and religion are potent forces here. Vice presidents
are carefully picked with these factors in mind: Buhari’s is
a southwestern Christian and Jonathan’s is a northern
Muslim. But it is not so simple. There are non-northerners
who would ordinarily balk at voting for a ‘northerner’ but
who support Buhari because he can presumably fight
corruption. There are northern supporters of Jonathan who
are not part of the region’s Christian minorities.
Delaying the elections is a staggeringly self-serving act of
contempt for Nigerians.
Last week, I was indifferent about the elections, tired of
television commercials and contrived controversies. There
were rumors that the election, which was scheduled for
February 14, would be postponed, but there always are; our
political space is a lair of conspiracies. I was uninterested
in the apocalyptic predictions. Nigeria was not imploding.
We had crossed this crossroads before, we were merely
electing a president in an election bereft of inspiration. And
the existence of a real opposition party that might very well
win was a sign of progress in our young democracy
Then, on Saturday, the elections were delayed for six
weeks. Nigeria’s security agencies, we were told, would not
be available to secure the elections because they would be
fighting Boko Haram and needed at least another month
and a half to do so. (Nigeria has been fighting Boko Haram
for five years, and military leaders recently claimed to be
ready for the elections.)
Even if the reason were not so absurd, Nigerians are
politically astute enough to know that the postponement
has nothing to do with security. It is a flailing act of
desperation from an incumbent terrified of losing. There are
fears of further postponements, of ploys to illegally extend
Jonathan’s term. In a country with the specter of a military
coup always hanging over it, the consequences could be
dangerous. My indifference has turned to anger. What a
staggeringly self-serving act of contempt for Nigerians. It
has cast, at least for the next six weeks, the darkest
possible shroud over our democracy: uncertainty.

The Unknown Ekiti Electoral Massacre Revealed

Election blues. The Nigeria political atmosphere is getting interesting daily. I am so sure that the leakage of this recording which obviously was done with the intention to keep a record of this 'transaction' is an indication that election issue in Nigeria is a serious game of 'serious' planning.

This story was culled from Sahara Reporters.

How Obanikoro, Fayose, Chris Uba And Brig. General Momoh Rigged Ekiti Governorship Election In Collusion With The Nigerian Army

The 37-minute recording details the conversation between these PDP leaders and politicians as they bribed Brigadier General Momoh with a promotion for his assistance in carrying out election fraud in Ekiti. In it, Obanikoro is clearly heard informing the group of men, “[I] am not here for a tea party, am on special assignment by the President.” 

Boko Haram In Trouble! Multi National Joint Task Force To The REscue.

RECENT reports from Borno State indicate that about 6,000 Boko Haram fighters are encircled by soldiers from the Multi National Joint Task Force (MNJTF) around Madagali and Gulak and are negotiating a possible surrender as the noose tightens.   Since 2009, Boko Haram has been waging a brutal war against Nigeria in a bid to establish an Islamic caliphate and over the last year has enjoyed substantial success on the battlefield. It scored military success, making sweeping gains across Borno, Adamawa and Yobe States, capturing 13 local government areas.   Alarmed by the raging success of the terrorists, Nigeria, Niger Republic, Chad and Cameroon decided to form the MNJTF that would enable to cooperate militarily. Over the last week, the MNJTF has enjoyed significant success, particularly with the arrival of battle-hardened Chadian troops who over the weekend reclaimed the town of Gamboru-Ngala near the Chad border with Nigeria.   In a further setback for Boko Haram, Nigerian troops were able to repel two spirited attacks on the Borno State capital Maiduguri, killing as many as 500 terrorists and seizing a large cache of weapons. Rather surprisingly, a British-made Vickers tank was among the armour seized, as were artillery guns, scores of pick-up trucks, anti-aircraft guns and rocket-propelled grenades.   Nigerian military sources believe the end is nigh now with Boko Haram surrounded and cornered into a small pocket of Borno State. According to unconfirmed military reports, about 4,000 of the terrorists are negotiating a surrender with the Nigerian authorities, although it is not clear if Boko Haram leader Sheikh Abubakar Shekau is involved in the talks.   One local eyewitness said: "The highway near Gulak is covered by artillery guns so it would be hard for Boko Haram to get through. The tide appears to be turning against them as at a fishing village on Lake Chad, local villagers broke into Boko Haram's recruiting office and seized all its contents which they then burnt in the village square."   It is not yet clear when and how a surrender would be implemented but Nigeria is said to be talking to its MNJTF allies about adopting a joint approach. It is also uncertain if Sheikh Shekau approves of the surrender as in the past, he has disassociated himself from any attempts to reach an accommodation with the Nigerian government. - See more at: http://www.nigerianwatch.com/news/6321-army-says-4000-boko-haram-fighters-negotiate-surrender-after-being-surrounded#sthash.EUq2tstf.oBotqO0Q.dpuf

Thinkology

Rare & engaging interviews and some more by a team of experienced & hungry pen users.