1st Sikh in decades graduates Army officer school

[Hauptmann]

http://news.yahoo.co...zdHNpa2hpbmRlYw--

1st Sikh in decades graduates Army officer school

U.S. Army Capt. Tejdeep Singh Rattan, center wearing turban, stands with other graduates during a U.S. Army officer basic training graduation ceremony at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio on Monday, March 22, 2010. Capt. Rattan is the first Sikh allowed to complete officer basic training while wearing the traditional turban and full beard since the Army altered the dress code, which had made exceptions for Sikh soldiers, in 1984.(NOTE: all photos - AP Photo/Darren Abate)

By MICHELLE ROBERTS, Associated Press Writer Michelle Roberts, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 37 mins agoSAN ANTONIO The soldiers in standard-issue fatigues and combat boots stood side-by-side repeating their creed: "I am an American soldier. I am a warrior and a member of a team. I serve the people of the United States and live the Army values ...."

Capt. Tejdeep Singh Rattan was no different except that he wore a full beard and black turban, the first Sikh in a generation allowed to complete U.S. Army basic officer training without sacrificing the articles of his faith. He completed the nine-week training Monday after Army officials made an exemption to a policy that has effectively prevented Sikhs from enlisting since 1984.

"I'm feeling very humbled. I'm a soldier," said the 31-year-old dentist, smiling after the ceremony at Fort Sam Houston. "This has been my dream."

Rattan had to get a waiver from the Army to serve without sacrificing the unshorn hair mandated by his faith. An immigrant from India who arrived in New York as a teenager, Rattan said he hopes his military commitment will allow him to give back to his adopted home country and will help diminish prejudice Sikhs sometimes face in the U.S.

The Army in 1984 eliminated an exemption that had previously allowed Sikhs to maintain their articles of faith while serving, but officials can issue individual waivers to the uniform policy after considering the effects on safety and discipline, said Army spokesman George Wright. Only a handful of such individual religious exemptions are ever granted.

Rattan and Dr. Kamaljeet Singh Kalsi, who will attend basic training this summer after completing an emergency medicine fellowship, are the first Sikhs to receive exemptions in more than 25 years.

Rattan who received a master's degree in engineering before pursuing a dental education_ and Kalsi both offer health care skills that are in high demand in an Army stretched by wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Rattan said he encountered no trouble from fellow soldiers during training.

"The Army is all about what you have to offer. If you're sitting back there, not doing anything, they're definitely going to talk about you. But if you're up there running with them, you have good scores, you run neck-and-neck with them, they love you," he said. "I made a lot of friends."

1st Sgt. Jeffrey DeGarmo said he made sure the officers-in-training in his unit understood that Rattan wasn't a foreign national and had received the Army's permission to maintain his beard and turban. Once the other soldiers understood that, there were no issues, he said.

"It went pretty well," DeGarmo said. "I think he did an outstanding job adjusting."

During training, Rattan wore a helmet over the small turban, which he doesn't remove, and was able to successfully create a seal with his gas mask despite the beard, resolving the Army's safety concerns, said Harsimran Kaur, the Sikh Coalition's legal director.

Rattan also worked with an Army tailor to create an insignia patch normally worn on soldiers' berets that could be affixed to his black turban, she said.

An estimated 300,000 Sikhs live in the United States. The unshorn hair wrapped in a turban and beard are required to keep adherents in the natural state in which God made them, said Amardeep Singh, director of the Sikh Coalition, a New York-based advocacy group that helped Rattan and Kalsi push for Army admittance.

The Sikh community has a long tradition of military service in India, from where most adherents originally emigrated, and in other countries, such as the United Kingdom and Canada. Sikhs represent 2 percent of India's population but make up about 30 percent of that country's army officers, Singh said.

Before the Army's regulation change in 1984, Sikhs served in the U.S. military during every major armed conflict going back to World War I. Those who joined before the change were allowed to serve with their beards and turbans, but the policy effectively prevented new enlistment of Sikhs, Kaur said.

The coalition continues to push the Army to change the overall policy.

"If government can say to someone, 'You can't serve, not for any reason that has to do with your abilities,' that sends the wrong message," Singh said. "We don't want to be perpetual outsiders."

Edited March 23, 2010 by Hauptman

[Hauptmann]

Dan

[Eric K.]

What to say? I am currently in the U.S. Army and just seeing this guy with a beard in uniform makes my blood boil.

I understand it's part of his religion and all, but I think you either conform to the Army or you don't join.

It just goes to show the bad situation the military is in, you can have tattoo's on your face and hands, you don't need a high school diploma,

felons are allowed in.Standards have dropped to a depressing level.

I am hoping that i a few years the Army will go back to what it once was, kind of like how the Army went down hill during Vietnam and after, but pulled itself together

again in the early 80's. Here's hoping.

Eric

[Hugh]

What to say? I am currently in the U.S. Army and just seeing this guy with a beard in uniform makes my blood boil.

I understand it's part of his religion and all, but I think you either conform to the Army or you don't join.

It just goes to show the bad situation the military is in, you can have tattoo's on your face and hands, you don't need a high school diploma,

felons are allowed in.Standards have dropped to a depressing level.

I am hoping that i a few years the Army will go back to what it once was, kind of like how the Army went down hill during Vietnam and after, but pulled itself together

again in the early 80's. Here's hoping.

Eric

I think if you read a little history, you'll find that the Sikhs are among the most effective soldiers in the world. Your other comments have some merit, but I suggest you dig a little deeper on this one.

Hugh

(30 years of service, not counting the Academy)

Edited March 24, 2010 by Hugh

[Eric K.]

I think if you read a little history, you'll find that the Sikhs are among the most effective soldiers in the world. Your other comments have some merit, but I suggest you dig a little deeper on this one.

Hugh

(30 years of service, not counting the Academy)

Why would I dig any deeper? This man has a beard and according AR 670-1 you are not permitted to have a beard...period. But now I guess with a waiver you can?

We have gotten so politically correct and racially sensitive that we're afraid of our own shadows.

And your comment about Sikh's being effective soldiers, well I hope he's a good dentist.

Eric

[peter monahan]

Risking getting political and here, but I have to agree with Hugh. Once upon a time, US Army regs. forbade the enlisting of Blacks. And of women. People with glasses. And so on. But time moves on and so do armies.

I assume none of those other things would meet with your approval, so why does this one get such a strong reaction? The name "Singh" means "lion" and traditionally, all 'baptized' male Sikhs use it, as a token that the culture began as a sect of martial Indians, defending their homeland against Mogul [Persian, Muslim] invaders. And, as Hugh says, their reputation as soldiers is second to none.

As one who was born in the US and so technically an American [Canadian by raising and residence] I'm flattered that a new immigrant wants to help defend his adopted, my birth country. And if his hair is long, so what? I've seen lots of raggedy-ass looking troops who fought like lions. And I've seen parade ground by-the-book REMFs whose dress and hair would delight a Sergeant Major and who weren't worth the bullet to shot them! Which would you rather have watching your back?

Peter

Edited March 24, 2010 by peter monahan

[Eric K.]

Risking getting political and here, but I have to agree with Hugh. Once upon a time, US Army regs. forbade the enlisting of Blacks. And of women. People with glasses. And so on. But time moves on and so do armies.

I assume none of those other things would meet with your approval, so why does this one get such a strong reaction? The name "Singh" means "lion" and traditionally, all 'baptized' male Sikhs use it, as a token that the culture began as a sect of martial Indians, defending their homeland against Mogul [Persian, Muslim] invaders. And, as Hugh says, their reputation as soldiers is second to none.

As one who was born in the US and so technically an American [Canadian by raising and residence] I'm flattered that a new immigrant wants to help defend his adopted, my birth country. And if his hair is long, so what? I've seen lots of raggedy-ass looking troops who fought like lions. And I've seen parade ground by-the-book REMFs whose dress and hair would delight a Sergeant Major and who weren't worth the bullet to shot them! Which would you rather have watching your back?

Peter

Wow strong statement there. I don't know where you get the idea that being black, a women or wearing glasses would get my disapproval??

ANd I'm not sure why your bent on thinking that I have a problem with Sikh's?

I DON'T CARE what religion you are, I DON'T CARE what color you are, I DON'T CARE what gender you are in the military.

I DO care about standards tho. This guy is in a soft skin MOS I'm sure he's not a killer that you all wish him to be.

I am an infantrymen, I served in a couple of wars and was wounded bad enough that I will be getting a medical discharge in the very near future.

And there is no way in hell that I would let any of my soldiers grow a beard, an it's people like you that say "So what if their hair is long" that is ruining our military and traditions.

By the way when did YOU see raggedy-ass troops fight like lions??

Eric

Edited March 24, 2010 by Eric K.

[Hugh]

Wow strong statement there. I don't know where you get the idea that being black, a women or wearing glasses would get my disapproval??

ANd I'm not sure why your bent on thinking that I have a problem with Sikh's?

I DON'T CARE what religion you are, I DON'T CARE what color you are, I DON'T CARE what gender you are in the military.

I DO care about standards tho. This guy is in a soft skin MOS I'm sure he's not a killer that you all wish him to be.

I am an infantrymen, I served in a couple of wars and was wounded bad enough that I will be getting a medical discharge in the very near future.

And there is no way in hell that I would let any of my soldiers grow a beard, an it's people like you that say "So what if their hair is long" that is ruining our military and traditions.

By the way when did YOU see raggedy-ass troops fight like lions??

Eric

I invite your attention to the performance of the brown-water sailors in Viet Nam under Admiral Zumwalt. I'm not talking about the ships offshore, but the guys on the patrol boats (PBR), working directly with the 9th US and other divisions. All the old-line officers (including me) were convinced that Zumwalt would destroy the morale, discipline and fighting capabilities of the Riverine Force. We were wrong. They were not raggedy-ass (well, not too much), but they did have long hair and beards. They kept as clean as they could and many of them did fight like lions.

To the best of my knowledge, the principal issue with beards is gas masks and access to wounds for treatment. This man seems to have solved the first, and, as you say, the second is not likely to be an issue for him.

You might also like to look at some of the pictures from the US Civil War. There were a few beards then. Standards change over time, presumably to meet the needs of the service. The old guys never like it and bitch about it, but the service moves on.

Hugh

(In-country '69-70)

Edited March 24, 2010 by Hugh

[Eric K.]

I invite your attention to the performance of the brown-water sailors in Viet Nam under Admiral Zumwalt. I'm not talking about the ships offshore, but the guys on the patrol boats (PBR), working directly with the 9th US and other divisions. All the old-line officers (including me) were convinced that Zumwalt would destroy the morale, discipline and fighting capabilities of the Riverine Force. We were wrong. They were not raggedy-ass (well, not too much), but they did have long hair and beards. They kept as clean as they could and many of them did fight like lions.

To the best of my knowledge, the principal issue with beards is gas masks and access to wounds for treatment. This man seems to have solved the first, and, as you say, the second is not likely to be an issue for him.

You might also like to look at some of the pictures from the US Civil War. There were a few beards then. Standards change over time, presumably to meet the needs of the service. The old guys never like it and bitch about it, but the service moves on.

Hugh

(In-country '69-70)

First thing, thanks for your service! you guys that served in Vietnam didn't,and to a degree still don't get the credit you deserve.

You are right about the beards, it is mainly for the fitting of the gas masks, which he will absolutely not be able to wear, so once again

we will have to change the standards (for him) again since he will not be able to participate in N.B.C. training, which even as a dentist he will have to do at least once a year.

So when does this stop? Will it be OK to smoke pot in the military because enough Rastafarian's complain they can't practice their religion?

How about the height and weight standards? Like I said I have zero problems with this guy besides him wearing a beard, and maybe the turban not sure if he can EVER take it off to wear a helmet etc...? There's plenty of Jews in the Army that wear a yamaka (spelling?),but they can wear it under a helmet and even under a beret, so this is perfectly fine.

I think that as American's were so afraid not to be PC that if the Army made a big stink about this guy's beard they would instantly be branded racist? As Peter did to me, go figure.

Eric

[Hugh]

First thing, thanks for your service! you guys that served in Vietnam didn't,and to a degree still don't get the credit you deserve.

You are right about the beards, it is mainly for the fitting of the gas masks, which he will absolutely not be able to wear, so once again

we will have to change the standards (for him) again since he will not be able to participate in N.B.C. training, which even as a dentist he will have to do at least once a year.

So when does this stop? Will it be OK to smoke pot in the military because enough Rastafarian's complain they can't practice their religion?

How about the height and weight standards? Like I said I have zero problems with this guy besides him wearing a beard, and maybe the turban not sure if he can EVER take it off to wear a helmet etc...? There's plenty of Jews in the Army that wear a yamaka (spelling?),but they can wear it under a helmet and even under a beret, so this is perfectly fine.

I think that as American's were so afraid not to be PC that if the Army made a big stink about this guy's beard they would instantly be branded racist? As Peter did to me, go figure.

Eric

Thanks for your nice note and for your service as well. If I understand the clipping, he was able to achieve a seal with the gas mask, so he met the standard there, at least on that occasion. I understand that he was also able to wear a helmet with the turban in place. (It's much smaller than typical.)

As you say, it's all about meeting the standards. If he can do that, he's OK in my books. If not, he's not.

Good luck with your rehab and your transfer to CIVLANT. Hope it works out for you.

Best,

Hugh

Raggedy-ass retiree