People feel that for our MPs the nation comes last

It would be most appropriate to review the working of Parliament during the last 60 years. We may need to attempt a balance-sheet of the many achievements and failures of Parliament as the supreme representative institution of the people from the first to the 15th Lok Sabha.

The first Parliament of India came into being on January 26, 1950 with the commencement of the Constitution and birth of the Republic. This was the provisional Parliament.

The first Constitution amendment was passed during its life. In retrospect, one of the other significant events during the life of the provisional Parliament was the Mudgal case. It was an indication of the high standard that the Founding Fathers wanted to establish that when H G Mudgal, a Congress member, was found to have used his position as a member to further the interests of the Bombay Bullion Association for a consideration, Nehru himself moved for setting up a committee to enquire into the matter and Mudgal lost his membership.

The first General Election under the Constitution was held in 1951-1952 and the bicameral Parliament with its two Houses -- the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha -- was duly constituted.

The first Lok Sabha (1952-1957) was constituted on April 17, 1952. Its first sitting was held on May 13, 1952.

An overview of developments in Parliamentary institutions since the first Lok Sabha reveals some very interesting and some disturbing facts. The number of days on which the Houses of Parliament sit each year and the time that is devoted to transacting business has come down considerably in recent years.

Even when they do meet, often little gets done. In the face of disturbances and shouting, the Houses have to be adjourned frequently. Even in Parliamentary circles now it is widely recognised that the ugly scenes of indecorous behaviour, indiscipline, pandemonia, etc lead to waste of precious Parliamentary time and loss of respect for the supreme representative institution of the people.

The special sitting of Parliament held to mark the 50 years of Independence, unanimously adopted a resolution on September 1, 1997 pledging adherence to rules of decorum and discipline. But, in practice, nothing has changed.

Parliament was conceived as the legislature or the law making body but of late, law making has ceased to be even the most important of its functions either qualitatively or quantitatively. From about 48 per cent, it has come down to occupy close to 20 per cent of its time.

The character of Parliament has also changed as a result of changes in membership composition. In the early years, our Parliament could legitimately boast of having some very outstanding and accomplished parliamentarians who could do honour to any Parliament of the world.

Once when a member drew the attention of Acharya J B Kriplani to the fact that he was criticising the Congress party which had attracted his own wife Sucheta Kriplani, the quick-witted Acharya retorted: 'All these years I thought Congressmen were stupid fools. I never knew they were gangsters too who ran away with other's wives'. The whole House roared with laughter.

When Dr Ram Manohar Lohia was pleading for Stalin's daughter Svetlana being given asylum in India on the ground of her marriage with an Indian, the charming lady member, Tarkeshwari Sinha, interjected to say that when Dr Lohia was not married how could he talk of conjugal sentiments?

Dr Lohia hit back: 'Tarkeshari, when did you give me any chance?'

Later, on one occasion, the heavyweight member Piloo Mody was accused of showing disrespect to the chair by speaking with his back towards the Speaker. Mody defended himself by saying, 'Sir, I have neither front, nor back, I am round.' Such wit and humour, late, have largely disappeared from the Houses of Parliament.

Until 1977, for the first 30 years of Independence, the Congress remained the dominant party with an undisputed majority.

Interestingly however, the Opposition while small in number was more effective and had greater impact in the earlier years. Perhaps, it was so because of the high quality and character of membership on both sides and largely because a stable government and secure leadership could show greater magnanimity and accommodate opposition viewpoints without losing face.

Once while rejecting an amendment moved by Rajaji, Nehru said: 'You see Rajaji, the majority is with me.' Rajaji retorted: 'Yes, Jawaharlal, the majority is with you, but the logic is with me.'

Nehru laughed with the House and accepted Rajaji's amendment. Such gestures are hardly conceivable now.

Attention needs to be drawn towards a distinct change in the content, canvas and culture of debates right from the first Lok Sabha days. In the earlier Lok Sabhas, there was much greater emphasis on discussion of national and international issues. Regional issues and local problems were left to be taken up in the state legislatures. People would flock to hear Nehru initiate debates on international situation, on foreign affairs, etc which were followed by high-level discussions from a national angle.

It seems that gradually but increasingly more regional and even local problems are coming to acquire greater relevance and importance for our members.

What perhaps may cause the greatest concern is not only the shift in emphasis but the fundamental change in approach and outlook. Sometimes it appears as if we are more and more looking at national problems from regional, communal, linguistic or otherwise parochial angles rather than the other way round.

The representative democracy and parliamentary institutions have endured in India for five decades is a great tribute to their strength and resilience.

There has, however, been in recent years quite some thinking and debate about the decline of Parliament, devaluation of Parliamentary authority, deterioration in the quality of members, poor levels of participation and the like.

Today, one notices a certain cynicism towards Parliamentary instuitions and erosion in the respect for normal Parliamentary processes and Parliamentarians. We have an unending debate in regard to the falling standards in the conduct of legislators as evidence by poor quality of debates, niggardly attendance in the Houses of legislatures, unruly behaviour of members, scenes of pandemonia and the like.

Once a Lok Sabha Speaker said he had to take aspirin tablets before taking the chair. Legislatures having members with criminal records, sale and purchase of legislators to obtain majority to stay in power or somehow come to power, mortgaging the interests of the nation and of future generations for self-interests in the business of power politics are the most common topics of popular discussion today.

The people are aghast and, and what is worse, they feel helpless.

Bashing Parliament and Parliamentarians has become a fashion with self-proclaimed intellectuals. This has to be deprecated because other institutions have perhaps declined more. But, it is true that in Parliamentary polity, there can be nothing sadder or more dangerous than the representative credentials of the representatives, with some honourable exceptions, becoming suspect and an increasing alienation taking place between the people and their representatives with the representatives losing the respect of the people.

Today, we are in a situation where sanctity of means has lost all value, meaning and relevance. If dacoits, smugglers, gangsters and foreign agents can help put us or sustain us in power, we are prepared to compromise with them. We do not hesitate to buy stability of our chairs by bribing fellow legislators.

The people feel that the new breed of politicians in all parties are selfish, power hungry, greedy, dishonest hypocrites and power merchants for whom the nation comes last and the welfare of the people is at the bottom of priorities. Their only concern is to amass wealth and somehow get to and stay in power. They are so busy in the struggle for power that they have no time or energy left for serving the people.

In the words of the former President R Venkatraman, they are 'no longer competitors in endeavour to serve the nation but are bitter enemies drawn in battle array.'

The above has been written by Dr Subhash C Kashyap and was posted on rediffmail

People feel that the new breed of politicians in all parties are selfish, power hungry, greedy, dishonest hypocrites and power merchants for whom the nation comes last, says Dr Subhash C Kashyap, former secretary general Lok Sabha.

I differ from Dr. Kashyap.

People not only feel, they know that the nation comes last for the present parliamentarians.

No wonder people are calling them all sorts of names including dacoits, murderers, rapists and what not.

Even if one MP has committd these heinous crimes it is a blot on all MPs and they have no right in questioning the people who expose these MPs.

Persecution of Hindus in Pakistan

This past week, the persecution of religious minorities in Pakistan was raised in India’s Parliament and led to Union Minister for External Affairs SM Krishna making a statement, with a particular reference to Pakistan’s tiny but beleaguered Hindu community. There was much discussion on the subject in political circles, the media and the social media too.

As can be expected, views varied strongly. There were sections that wanted default refugee status for Hindus who fled or left Pakistan and came to India. There were calls for immediate offers of citizenship to these embattled people. Others took the view that India should petition and raise the issue with the international community. After all, there were clearly-defined principles as to how countries must treat, and the freedom and autonomy they must accord, their minorities. The common-sense retort to that was that it was impossible for the international community to get Pakistan to ensure anything at all, whether related to its minority communities or indeed its majority community as well.

It has been easy to consider the matter of Hindus in Pakistan as a cause for the Indian Right, for the BJP and the Sangh Parivar. It is equally easy to contend that the Left and the Congress, the urban intelligentsia and foreign policy pundits must take a more detached view, calling for international action and cautioning against emotionalism and entanglement in domestic politics.

While there are persuasive arguments to be made on either side, it is worth asking if the implicit divide on the question of India’s responsibility vis-à-vis Pakistan’s Hindus that we see today has been with us ever since 1947. Were things always so clear cut?

Some years ago, this writer was researching the history of religious tensions and violence in Calcutta (now Kolkata) in the post-Partition period. An educative set of incidents from 1964 that emerged shook a lot of contemporary certitudes.

On December 26, 1963, a lock of hair believed to belong to the Prophet disappeared from Srinagar’s Hazratbal shrine. There was uproar in the Kashmir Valley. Crowds of 1,00,000 and more came out on the streets and stone-throwing and violence resulted, in turn triggering police firing. On January 4, 1964, the holy relic reappeared, almost as mysteriously as it had vanished. There were many theories about the episode, including the role of Indian intelligence agencies, but that should not detain us here. The locus of this article is not Kashmir, it is further east in the sub-continent.

On January 3, what had begun as a peaceful protest against the theft in Hazratbal, turned into an angry mob in Khulna, East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The brunt of the fury was borne by Khulna’s Hindus. The riots spread to Jessore and other cities in East Pakistan/East Bengal. There was growing unrest in India, especially in West Bengal, home to many Hindu migrants from East Pakistan, some of whom still had relatives across the Padma.

Politicians jumped in. A Congress session was in progress. VK Krishna Menon, eager to establish his nationalist and hawkish credentials after the humiliation of the China war just over a year earlier, accused Pakistan of atrocities on its minorities. He charged it with waging a “war of hostages”.

In Calcutta, Opposition parties — largely from the Left, since the Congress ruled in Writers’ Buildings, as it did in South Block — and student organisations started protesting outside the Pakistan Deputy High Commission. Makhan Pal, leader of the Revolutionary Socialist Party — and a familiar name to anybody who followed Left Front politics in West Bengal in the 1980s — was vocal in demanding (East) Pakistani authorities protect their Hindu citizens. In border villages, rumours spread of a Pakistani attack. These were quickly believed, given memories of the Chinese invasion of 1962. Hindu refugees (both from within India and from East Pakistan) began moving towards Calcutta.

Meanwhile, protesting students in Calcutta turned unruly, and one of them was shot by the police. This made the situation worse, rioting was now inevitable and the Muslim community in then Calcutta came under attack in a counter-mobilisation. Left parties in West Bengal had a strong constituency among Partition-era refugees and so were accused of fanning the fires. Full-scale riots broke out in Calcutta and in outlying districts. By January 11, the Army had been called in and many neighbourhoods of Calcutta were under curfew.

It was the city’s most lethal religious battle since the 1940s. There were cases of stabbing on the streets, the Army and curfew measures proved ineffective in entirely curbing the violence. An exhibition commemorating Swami Vivekananda’s birth centenary was attacked at the Park Circus Maidan in south Calcutta and partially burnt down. At this point, Gulzari Lal Nanda, then Union Minister for Home Affairs, flew down to assist the State Government.

By January 24 peace had returned. Curfew had been lifted from all parts of Calcutta. The previous fortnight had claimed 65 lives. This included 21 Hindus and eight Muslims who fell to police bullets.

Now comes the interesting aftermath. On January 27, a ‘citizens’ convention’ was held in a hall at the Calcutta University Institute. Here all political parties, other than the Congress, demanded the removal of restrictions on the migration of Hindus from Pakistan to India.

Jyoti Basu was a speaker at this convention, where the Communist Party of India (it hadn’t yet been divided and the CPI(M) had not been born), the Forward Bloc and even something called the Bolshevik Party shared a platform with, and agreed on the status of Pakistan’s Hindu minorities with, the Jana Sangh. Basu expressed his anguish at the plight of Hindus in East Pakistan. Nevertheless, he was heckled by the crowd because — ever a better communist than a Hindu — he refused to criticise China for its nexus with Pakistan.

Today, the CPI(M) and the other Left parties would not want to be reminded of the chilling Calcutta January of 1964. Today, the business of Hindus in Pakistan is a BJP affair, a point for the Hindu Right and supposedly not a mainstream concern. Fifty years ago it was all so different. Was Indian politics more honest then — or simply just as expedient?

The above is written by Ashok Mallick, a regular writer in "The Pioneer"

‘Journalism’ and the Modi Bashing Cottage Industry

The riots that took place in Gujarat in 2002 were unfortunate, akin to any riot that take place in the country or in the world. However, the Gujarat riots stand isolated in nature, for a unique purpose. The episode is seen more as an unending conspiracy crusade by a relentless team comprising of Teesta Setalvad, Sanjiv Bhatt, Sreekumar, Mukul Sinha and yes: some inevitable ubiquitous journalists. Their end goal is obvious and specific: vilify, demonize and slander Chief Minister of Narendra Modi. And the garb they use? ‘The so called justice’.

What we have been witnessing for quite some time in India is biased news at its best: this time Times of India has done complete justice to the aspect. Mainstream media, especially TOI has been quite vocal about the report related to Gujarat riots given by Raju Ramakrishnan, the Amicus Curiae.The entire report has never given any dismal picture about Narendra Modi. It has however a sentence which means vaguely that if circumstances go in a certain direction, there might be a possibility of Modi being prosecuted. Mainstream media swooped down on the sentence, made a monster out of the same and plastered the walls of their news displays “Amicus Curiae says investigate Modi”. DNA at least had the sense to edit their title at a later stage (see the image). Many news sources still shamelessly retain their old titles.

Here comes the obvious question: why is the mainstream media silent about the SIT report which has given a clean chit to Modi? Mainstream media says everything under the sun, except the clean chit given to Modi. Instead the bandwagon has been highlighting the Amicus Curiae’s statement which is a fragment of a complete report, which further is a chip of the major SIT report.

This is not the first time TOI has done its dirty trick. In 2012, the Godhra episode trailed behind by 10 years. TOI decided to capitalize the event. They embarked on their favourite pastime : Modi hunting, this time with a special dedication to their Ahmedabad edition. The front page was streaked with a ‘Godhra Report, TOI Version’. The day was referred to as ‘Doomsday’, with a title ‘Action, Reaction and Inaction’. For those of you who have perused the report, they had proclaimed their version of judgement, a multiple number of times, before the Honourable Court of India pronounced the real judgement. TOI’s judgement was based on assumption and myths, with a glaring absence of any shred of evidence. The judgement was declared in title: ‘inaction’, obviously daggering the Chief Minister. What followed on the entire page was a single sided report, supposedly a list of occurrences of the day.

I am curious: the Anti-Sikh Riots and Massacre of Kashmiri Pundits are some of the worst episodes of gore witnessed by modern India. Does TOI and other mainstream media houses observe the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots the same way? So far, nothing has been seen on the Decennial, Vicennial observances of the gruesome incident which spanned for 4 days from 31 October 1984 − 3 November 1984, where Congressmen mercilessly slaughtered 2,700 Sikhs. No reports ever, so far voicing concern for those 20, 000 who fled Delhi and 50, 000 who were displaced. TOI has not yet taken up similar campaigns on the largely displaced and badly scarred Kashmiri Pandit community that still awaits justice.

SIT report, which is the outcome of a long investigation, prepared by a team after 3 years has not even a murmur in the media. But solitary utterances by a person or so gets blown out of proportion. The ‘controversial meeting convened by Narendra Modi’ was attended by other senior officers as well. Has any one of us ever heard their statements ringing out? However, the statement made by a rogue elephant gets full coverage. Sanjiv Bhatt is media’s latest darling as his statements and views are palatable to media houses. The larger picture is easily discernible: there is a vested interest behind their stories.

Coming to the present scenario, lets begin with the shocking revelation made by the Special Investigation Team, regarding the role of media, to be precise ‘Times of India’, in the ‘Narendra Modi Vilification Campaign’: the reports reveal how Manoj Mitta, TOI journalist helped in the drafting of a cleverly structured ‘anti-Modi affidavit’. He was the one who added flesh and spice into a cartload of defamation originally framed by Sanjiv Bhatt. And so with the entire affidavit looking spruced up, Sanjiv Bhatt marched to the Supreme Court.

Quoting the paragraph in the report where the SIT exposes one among those numerous dirty plots hatched by the Anti-Modi conspirators:

That Ms. Teesta Setalwad, her lawyer Shri Mihir Desai and Journalist Shri Manoj Mitta of Times of India were in constant touch with Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS and were instrumental in arranging / drafting of the affidavit for filing the same in honourable Supreme court. Vide email dated 10-4-2011, Shri Bhatt solicited “Co-ordinates” from Ms. Teesta Setalwad, who had also arranged for a meeting with her lawyer Shri Mihir Desai at Ellis bridge Gymkhana, Ahmedabad. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt sent the first draft of his proposed affidavit to Shri Manoj Mitta on 13-4-2011, after meeting Shri Mihir Desai, Advocate and invited his suggestions. Shri Manoj Mitta advised Shri Sanjiv Bhatt to incorporate a few more paragraphs drafted by him which were incorporated by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt in his final affidavit sent to honorable Supreme Court of India as suggested by Shri Mitta.

Let us cast Mitta aside for some time and tackle the main perpetrator: mainstream media house, this time, again, Times of India. The news house seems to have gone rabid by splashing their website with so- called news clips, which contain anything but credibility. Taking up 3 of their latest news pieces:

The first one speaks of Sanjiv Bhatt being a ‘pivot’. Bhatt has been a proven conspirator in more than a single way. 9 police officers who were quizzed in the most intricate manner, separately have testified that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present in the meeting. This is enough for any discerning human to understand that Bhatt is lying. And if this is meagre evidence, the SIT has a 40 page section dedicated solely to Bhatt and his misgivings.

“certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs, and some political leaders were trying to use honorable Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores”.

“Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.”

However, TOI has been craftily avoiding everything else, coming up with the statement saying that the statements given by other police officers in the meeting is the only evidence that stands against Bhatt. Either they wrote the story without reading the SIT report (which is open to the general public now) or they turned chef and cooked a brilliant lie with the most obvious intention. According TOI, the 3 years of rigorous ground work put in by the SIT commissioned by the Supreme Court of India stands void.

The second news piece published by TOI voices a doubt if Narendra Modi paid for SIT Chief Raghavan’s foreign trips. The clip is not a news piece. It is based on multiple suppositions and assumptions and with a plunge into conclusion that Raghavan might have undertaken a foreign trip for which the Gujarat Government might have paid.Any proof TOI?Going by this wonderful logic of clubbing together suppositions to arrive at a conclusion, let us come back to the curious case of Manoj Mitta, a die hard anti-Ayodhya writer (his articles gives one the feeling that he never wants the temple to be built). Now, the Karsevaks returning from Ayodhya, were burnt in the train in 2002- the very same Karsevaks, who demolished the mosques, seeking the Hindu’s rights for re-establishing their temple. The scorching of the Karsevaks was obviously by an anti-Ayodhya crowd. And since Manoj Mitta has been ‘anti-Ayodhya’ in outlook, is it sane and sensible to suppose that he had a hand in the Godhra riots? (The same logic behind ‘if A=B and B=C, then A=C’

No, is it not? Well, TOI, you need to learn much from your own stories!! The third news clip speaks of the Chief Minister doing his best to curb the lawlessness that engulfed his land, but with a dig referring to him as ‘awfully busy Narendra Modi‘. Now, Narendra Modi is, as stated by media (truthfully, for once) a busy man. Step into the state of Gujarat and you can see what the person has been doing to justify for his ‘busy-ness‘. The state looks bloomed- not superficially, but from its very depths. Coming back to the riot-ridden days, Narendra Modi was indeed ‘awfully busy’, not lazing about sun-warming himself.

‘Narendra Modi‘, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, whose land was seized by riots, was “awfully busy with the steps to control the law and order situation, providing medical treatment to the riot victims, their rehabilitation, giving ex-gratia payment to the riot affected, NGO relief camps and with the payment of compensation for destruction of properties during the riots, and also with his efforts to restore peace and normalcy in the state,” says the SIT report. The report even states that the Army was brought in, at the right time. Why has TOI conveniently chosen the first two words of an entire paragraph, blissfully choosing to ignore the rest of the statement?

Not just now, but from the very minute the riots began, nasty journalism reinvented itself, with a new face. Quoting as example, Modi’s answer to SIT team, when he was thoroughly interrogated, where he exposed how Times of India ‘conducted an interview with him, without even contacting him’. When exposed, they hurriedly cooked up their denial story, which was cozily tucked up in some remote corner of the TOI newspaper

What NDTV has done is selective quoting, by omitting a large section, making it appear again that …. Narendra Modi resorted to ‘illegal orders’ ! Shame on you NDTV. CNN IBN is not the least behind, when it comes to this kind of selective reporting.

This is not an isolated case of title manipulation by NDTV. Another interesting case was a mammoth blunder made by NDTV.Here goes it: 15 February, 2012, when many were waiting for the Gujarat court’s verdict: will a copy of the SIT report be handed over to Zakia Jaffrey or not? Court verdict said ‘No”. But NDTV had a kept ready, a copy of what can be termed as ‘media’s verdict’: ‘Give the 2002 riot reports to Zakia Jaffrey: Gujarat Court to SIT’. With the report ready, the same was published by them on their website, without actually looking into the real facts. There must have been jubilation and celebrations and the channel repeatedly nailed Narendra Modi on TV. Suddenly the story went off air, for mysterious reasons. Later the reason was known- the actual verdict by the court was something else: ‘No Report for Zakia in Gujarat Riots Case: Court’ . NDTV hurriedly made its correction and covered its folly by not taking up the issue for a couple of hours.

For mainstream media, ‘Narendra Modi’ continues to be its favourite fodder, vital for existence. Blame Narendra Modi, vilify Narendra Modi, add Narendra Modi as spice to the most irrelevant aspect and garner fame… the media tactics spinning around the Chief Minister of Gujarat are numerous. Media, as we see, will do anything to remain in the limelight and increase its viewership. They will also do anything to earn a few extra coins. They have known well enough that demonizing Narendra Modi incessantly will keep their pockets jingling with the yellow metal and so they continue to do it for ever….

Judas knew Jesus, he knew His mission, and yet for a few coins he betrayed him.‎

The above has been posted by Vineetha Menon on India Wires.

I have two chief ministers in India whom I really admire because of their achievement in spite of being non-congress ruled states.

# 1, Narendra Modi

# 2, Nitish Kumar

It is easy to go with a begging bowl to Delhi when you are part of a ruling alliance and the central party has to

listen patiently to your demands.

The writer asks why nothing has been done for the Kashmiri pundits who have been driven out of their homes.

It is because the Hindus in India have no vote banks. Our politicians have divided us by our castes so that we are not a united force and these politicians can do what they want.

But then why does the western world make such a hullabaloo.

It is because of the oil the Muslim countries have under their soil.

The western countries now have Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Libya and the UAE under their belt, in their pockets.They are now also trying to do the same to Iran to bring their rule their.

Why don't they interfere in any of the African countries like Sudan who are creating all this piracy problem.

It is because Sudan does not have much oil.

What about the Sikh riots? Why didn't the western country raise their voice.

Because the Sikhs too do not have a lobby in their countries and there is no oil in Punjab and most important the first family of India, Nehru-Gandhi and the Congress party was involved. The TOI and other media must follow the dictates of the west because they hanker for financial help and awards from the West

End of an Era.........

Deeply saddened and hard to put in words....truly the end of an era....a lifetime of service, faith, discipline, love and compassion... Brother Fitzpatrick was a unique soul.....there will never be another - all of us are greatly indebted....he made us what we are today!

Absolutely no doubt in my mind that he's joined his Maker ....you will be truly missed Dear Sir.

In deep sympathy....

Viraj P. Thacker (GMS'81).

'I LOVE YOU!'

After 21 years of Marriage, my Wife wanted me to take another Woman out to Dinner and a Movie.

She said I Love You but I know this other Woman loves you and would Love to spend some Time with You.

The other Woman that my Wife wanted me to visit was my MOTHER, who has been a Widow for 19 years,but the demands of my Work and my three Children had made it possible to visit her only occasionally.

That night I called to Invite her to go out for Dinner and a Movie.

'What's wrong, are you well,'she asked?

My Mother is the type of Woman who suspects that a Late Night Call or a Surprise Invitation is a sign of Bad News.

'I thought that it would be pleasant to be with you,'

I responded. 'Just the two of us.'

She thought about it for a moment, and then said,

'I would like that very much.'

That Friday after work, as I drove over to pick her up I was a bit Nervous.

When I arrived at her House, I noticed that she too seemed to be Nervous about our Date.

She waited in the Door with her Coat on.

She had Curled her Hair and was wearing the Dress that she had worn to Celebrate her last Wedding Anniversary.

She smiled from a face that was as Radiant as an Angel's.

'I told my Friends that I was going to go out with My Son, and they were impressed, '

She said, as she got into the Car.

'They can't wait to hear about our meeting'.

We went to a Restaurant that, although not Elegant, was very Nice and Cozy.

My Mother took my Arm as if She were the First Lady.

After we sat down, I had to read the Menu. Large Print.

H

alf way through the entries, I lifted my eyes and saw Mom sitting there staring at me.

A Nostalgic Smile was on her Lips.

'It was I who used to have to Read the Menu when you were Small,'

She said.

'Then it's Time that you Relax and let me Return the Favor,'

I responded.

During the Dinner, we had an Agreeable Conversation, nothing Extra-ordinary, but catching up on recent Events of each others Life.

We talked so much that we missed the Movie.

As we arrived at her House later,

She said, 'I'll go out with you again, but only if you let me invite you.'

I agreed.

'How was your Dinner Date?' asked My Wife when I got Home.

'Very Nice. Much more so than I could have Imagined,' I answered.

A few days later, my Mother died of a Massive Heart Attack.

It happened so suddenly that I didn't have Time to do anything for her.

Some time later, I received an Envelope with a Copy of a Restaurant Receipt from the same place Mother and I had dined.

An Attached Note Said:

'I paid this Bill in Advance.

I wasn't sure that I could be there;

But nevertheless,I paid for Two Plates

“One for You and the other for Your Wife."

You will never know what that Night meant for Me. I Love You, My Son.'

At that moment, I understood the Importance of saying in Time: 'I LOVE YOU!'

and to give our Loved Ones the Time that they Deserve.

Nothing in Life is more important than God and your Family.

Give them the Time they Deserve, because these Things cannot be Put Off till 'Some Other Time.'

Sent by Arun Shroff

This is a reminder for you since we often forget our near & dear ones & take them for granted, ignore them assuming that they dont need our attention,L O V E-specially mother-lest it is too late. It is a poignant story of us all since we are engrossed in our work,family whom we give all love & attention. Good Luck friends, if you can repair in time to earn extra blessings of your mother.

Bro. T P Fitzpatrick

BR. FITZPATRICK PASSED AWAY THIS MORNING IN A HOSPITAL HALDWANI (NEAR NAINITAL). MAY HIS SOUL REST IN PEACE.

The above was received from Bro Martin Fernandez and posted by Avijit Guha on FB.

Its a very sad day.

One of the prime links with GMS has gone

I know many of our boys have been in direst contact with Bro. Fitzpatrick.

He was the principal of Goethals when I was admitted in 1955.

I held him in awe as I did not know much English then and he always wanted us to speak in Englsh.

The last time we met him was in the centenary celebrations and he looked hale and hearty for his age.

There are many who cherish our acquaintance with him and been the better because of him

Sunday Quickie

The only way to pull off a Sunday afternoon "quickie" with their 8-year old son in the apartment was to send him out on the balcony with a Popsicle and tell him to report on all the neighborhood activities.

"There's a car being towed from the parking lot," he shouted. He began his commentary as his parents put their plan into operation:

"An ambulance just drove by!"

"Looks like the Andersons have company," he called out.

"Matt's riding a new bike!"

"Looks like the Sanders are moving!"

"Jason is on his skate board!"

After a few moments he announced, "The Coopers are having sex!!"

Startled, his mother and dad shot up in bed. Dad cautiously called out, "How do you know they're having sex?"

"Jimmy Cooper is standing on his balcony with a Popsicle too."

Sent by Prakash Bhartia