It is amazing how much media will try to sensationalize an issue and make their magazines sell.
This is a headline based on a report soon to be published in the Outlook magazine. There are some finding as per the report.
"Muslims were not trusted by the security apparatus because of fears they could sympathise with Pakistan"
"Sikhs have not been used as bodyguards since Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her personal Sikh bodyguards in 1984 at the height of a Sikh insurgency"
I am not sure what to make of this. What is the magazine trying to imply?
Is it implying that there is a conceited effort going on to ensure that no sikh or a muslim joins the armed forces? that there are unwritten rules that states so....
This is plain stupid.
I would have been agitated if it was said that someone (be it any religion) is not employed in the Armed forces based only his religion not on his abilities. But if someone says to be that it is solely because of religion and there is an agenda stating that....Then as far as i am concerned that is plain, dumb stupidity.
And another way to sell magazines. I am sorry guys, I don't buy this argument.
Do read the Indian Express Report here