• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Judge Says D.C. Could Still See Terror Trials | Main | Magic Kingdom: Lobbyist Wanted »

December 17, 2009


Dave Abbott

OK. Nicknames are just that. I am a vet (1968-72), and we had one guy nicknamed "Mad Dog." He was terminally skinny, gentle-spirited, and quiet. He got the name because he was so shy that he never spoke.

Get the idea? Sometimes a nickname is applied ironically. GI's have great senses of humor. We had another guy whose nickname was "Bambi." He was ferocious, and no one dared call him that to his face.

Vlewis Peartree

I am not an attorney, but as a lay-person and former military (USN '74-'76)I can say that it is not atypical for someone to use a what the article calls a "nick-name" or what is known in the military as a "call-sign" that suggests aggression, belligerence, or strength.

Call-signs are used to keep an enemy that might be intercepting a radio transmission from determining the actual names of the individual sending or receiving the transmission their-by avoiding retaliation or unit identification.

The call-signs "Extreme" and "Savage Viking" seem pretty tame to me considering some I heard serving in a combat zone.

I would think that the defense has little to worry about in today's environment.


They're fine ones to cry about abuse.


To be sure, it appears that there is distance between merely introducing the name and "abusing" it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad