Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

Posted on: May 4, 2011 12:37 pm
Edited on: May 4, 2011 3:53 pm
 
Posted by Andy Benoit
R. Mendenhall (US Presswire)
Steelers running back Rashard Mendenhall caused quite a stir Monday night when, after the news about bin Laden’s death, he tweeted, “What kind of person celebrates death? It's amazing how people can HATE a man they have never even heard speak. We've only heard one side...”

He also tweeted about 9/11, saying, “We'll never know what really happened. I just have a hard time believing a plane could take a skyscraper down demolition style." (Mendenhall later removed that tweet from his twitter account.)

On Wednesday, the 23-year-old Mendenhall wrote a blog titled "Clarification". Here it is in its entirety:

"I appreciate those of you who have decided to read this letter and attain a greater understanding of my recent twitter posts. I see how they have gotten misconstrued, and wanted to use this outlet as a way to clear up all things that do not truthfully represent myself, what I stand for personally, and any organization that I am a part of.

Mendenhall

 First, I want people to understand that I am not in support of Bin Laden, or against the USA. I understand how devastating 9/11 was to this country and to the people whose families were affected. Not just in the US, but families all over the world who had relatives in the World Trade Centers. My heart goes out to the troops who fight for our freedoms everyday, not being certain if they will have the opportunity to return home, and the families who watch their loved ones bravely go off to war. Last year, I was grateful enough to have the opportunity to travel over seas and participate in a football camp put on for the children of US troops stationed in Germany. It was a special experience. These events have had a significant impact in my life.
           
“What kind of person celebrates death? It's amazing how people can HATE a man they have never even heard speak. We've only heard one side...”
          
This controversial statement was something I said in response to the amount of joy I saw in the event of a murder. I don’t believe that this is an issue of politics or American pride; but one of religion, morality, and human ethics. In the bible, Ezekiel 33:11 states, “Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!...”. I wasn’t questioning Bin Laden’s evil acts. I believe that he will have to face God for what he has done. I was reflecting on our own hypocrisy. During 9/11 we watched in horror as parts of the world celebrated death on our soil. Earlier this week, parts of the world watched us in horror celebrating a man’s death.   

Nothing I said was meant to stir up controversy. It was my way to generate conversation. In looking at my timeline in its entirety, everything that I’ve said is with the intent of expressing a wide array of ideas and generating open and honest discussions, something I believe we as American citizens should be able to do. Most opinions will not be fully agreed upon and are not meant to be. However, I believe every opinion should be respected or at least given some thought. I apologize for the timing as such a sensitive matter, but it was not meant to do harm. I apologize to anyone I unintentionally harmed with anything that I said, or any hurtful interpretation that was made and put in my name. 

It was only meant to encourage anyone reading it to think."

Since this controversy, Mendenhall's Twitter following is grown considerably. On Tuesday afternoon, he had 13,631 followers. On Wednesday afternoon, he had 36,914.


For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.


Comments
fghdfre
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 2, 2012 8:33 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



hgtrerte
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 27, 2011 11:00 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



tomlye
Since: Nov 28, 2011
Posted on: November 30, 2011 10:25 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: May 3, 2011
Posted on: May 7, 2011 2:03 pm
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

 Hearst publishing, who is largely responsible by way of their sensationalist reporting for getting support for the Spanish-American War. 
The Spanish American War occured in 1898. Not exactly what a rational person would consider a topical issue to use as an example. With almost 114 years passing since, I'm thinking the company might be run by different people now.

Here's another important fact to keep in mind when you trot out Yellow Journalism and how evil Hearst is/was Hearst Aqquired "The New York Journal" and got into and bitter circulation war with a rival New York Newspaper called New York World. This war did spawn the Yellow Journalism, sensationalization, but it's not like that sent Hearst in to hiding or even had him looked down upon in society.  AFTER this circulation war, he was twice elected as a Democrat to the US House of Representives.  

Another family to use as an example of how generations change is the Kennedys.

Joe Kennedy had deep mob ties and banked the enitire Kennedy family on money he made in the illegal sale of alchohol during prohibition, yet just a generation later his son is President, his other son the US Attorney General and other son a US Senator.







Since: May 3, 2011
Posted on: May 7, 2011 11:18 am
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

This was written by xemnor.  A few posts later he then go ahead and posts a link to Popular Mechanics, as if that is any different than what he had just bashed another poster for.  Kettle?  Pot?  Black?

FYI, Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Publishing.  When you look up Yellow Journalism, normally the first example given is Hearst publishing, who is largely responsible by way of their sensationalist reporting for getting support for the Spanish-American War.  I believe the famous quote from Hearst was "You give me the pictures.  I'll give you the war."  Things haven't changed much from then.  People are lazy and never verify what the mainstream media is telling them.

All Popular Mechanics does in its rebuttal to the so-called "truthers" was create straw men arguments and argue those.  There is very little substantial information that actually relates directly to the strongest evidence brought forth by the so-called truther movement.  They pick and choose which evidence they want to address, and they almost always pick the arguments made by the most fringe portion of the so-called "truther" movement - the same evidence that the majority of the "truther" movement has written off.  They obviously understand that most of their readers are not going to actually attempt to verify what they say or research the numerous rebuttals that have thoroughly refuted their articles.

But this is why this debate rarely goes anywhere, and is also why I do not attempt to go there. 

And to the "truthers". you would probably get a little further if you didn't jump to any conclusions regarding who was responsible and how it was pulled off.  You are best to just admit that you have absolutely no idea what happened, but there are still a lot of questions that were never addressed in the joke of an investigation performed by the commission.

Cost of 9-11 investigation?  $3 Million
Cost of Bill Clinton Blow Job Investigation?  $40 million

And for those that think that because NIST scientists (who just happen to be employees of the President's Administration under that Department of Commerce) are 100% credible, there is a reason they are government employees; it's because they couldn't cut it in the private industry where the best in any field end up working.

Oh, and did you know that Donald Rumsfeld has never even heard of WTC 7?  Interesting


The truther site is a site that has an agenda is it not?? YES, it is. You're aware of that right?

 

Popular Mechanics is not a magazine dedicated to any particular cause. If you feel you have evidence (beyond your opinion) please bring it ..but you won't...

 

There are many sites that de-bunk 911 truther claims, yet I didn't use any in order to remain consistent, had I brought an agenda driven rag like the truther site to the table your point might sound a bit less ignorant.

 

Still waiting to see something credible on those "Military Bomb Experts" who testified that the planes could not bring down the towers??

Where are those??

 

And while were on that subject, you say that the NIST is not credible because they are employees of the President. Did you overlook that the President is also the Commander and Chief of those same, mythical, "Military Bomb Experts"??

Seems a bit contradictory on your part? Please explain??

 

What does the Clinton thing have to do with anything other than to cloud the issue we're discussing??

 

When Popular mechanics does the report on the Pentagon and the truthers claims that a plane did not hit the Pentagon and they interview the first responding structural engineer, Allyn E. Kilsheimer

.

His Quote:

"It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"


But you know better right? He's not credible I suppose. The parts of the plane he held in his hands, the crew members uniforms with body parts still in some of them, all just BS right.

 

Good call...







Since: May 3, 2011
Posted on: May 7, 2011 10:23 am
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

Regardless of all the arguments from those that don't find anything funny about a building collapsing from fire (which is the official reason, not the plane), at least we now have a much cheaper way to demolish buildings!!!  Instead of all the work that demolition companies put into it, we now know that all we need to do is light a match and sit tight for a few hours!
Classic truther-speak. There was a fire that brought down the towers. The plane and it's full load of jetfuel, that slammed in to the tower at 590 mph, just happened to be there too. I realize you truthers have a lot of time invested in this and you can't let it go but think before you post and don't just flail wildly with nonsense. Your theroies have all been put to rest. Truthers ask the same questions over and over again and ignore the answers. They bring nothing to the table in the way of facts from credible sources. Ask a truther to bring you some credible back up on their theories and you'll either get a link to the truther site or they turtle and move on.




Since: Dec 4, 2009
Posted on: May 6, 2011 10:49 pm
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

Has there ever been a more unlikeable backfield than Mendehall and Ben



Since: Dec 5, 2006
Posted on: May 6, 2011 9:08 pm
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

Regardless of all the arguments from those that don't find anything funny about a building collapsing from fire (which is the official reason, not the plane), at least we now have a much cheaper way to demolish buildings!!!  Instead of all the work that demolition companies put into it, we now know that all we need to do is light a match and sit tight for a few hours!
Add a large amount of jet fuel and the impact of a pretty big aircraft slamming into the side of the building, and yeah, that's a pretty good way of taking a skyscraper down.




Since: Dec 20, 2006
Posted on: May 6, 2011 7:48 pm
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

Regardless of all the arguments from those that don't find anything funny about a building collapsing from fire (which is the official reason, not the plane), at least we now have a much cheaper way to demolish buildings!!!  Instead of all the work that demolition companies put into it, we now know that all we need to do is light a match and sit tight for a few hours!



Since: Dec 20, 2006
Posted on: May 6, 2011 7:45 pm
 

Mendenhall writes blog post explaining his tweets

Bringing a link to the truthers website is A.) Lazy and B.) drives your credibility in to the dirt.
This was written by xemnor.  A few posts later he then go ahead and posts a link to Popular Mechanics, as if that is any different than what he had just bashed another poster for.  Kettle?  Pot?  Black?

FYI, Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Publishing.  When you look up Yellow Journalism, normally the first example given is Hearst publishing, who is largely responsible by way of their sensationalist reporting for getting support for the Spanish-American War.  I believe the famous quote from Hearst was "You give me the pictures.  I'll give you the war."  Things haven't changed much from then.  People are lazy and never verify what the mainstream media is telling them.

All Popular Mechanics does in its rebuttal to the so-called "truthers" was create straw men arguments and argue those.  There is very little substantial information that actually relates directly to the strongest evidence brought forth by the so-called truther movement.  They pick and choose which evidence they want to address, and they almost always pick the arguments made by the most fringe portion of the so-called "truther" movement - the same evidence that the majority of the "truther" movement has written off.  They obviously understand that most of their readers are not going to actually attempt to verify what they say or research the numerous rebuttals that have thoroughly refuted their articles.

But this is why this debate rarely goes anywhere, and is also why I do not attempt to go there. 

And to the "truthers". you would probably get a little further if you didn't jump to any conclusions regarding who was responsible and how it was pulled off.  You are best to just admit that you have absolutely no idea what happened, but there are still a lot of questions that were never addressed in the joke of an investigation performed by the commission.

Cost of 9-11 investigation?  $3 Million
Cost of Bill Clinton Blow Job Investigation?  $40 million

And for those that think that because NIST scientists (who just happen to be employees of the President's Administration under that Department of Commerce) are 100% credible, there is a reason they are government employees; it's because they couldn't cut it in the private industry where the best in any field end up working.

Oh, and did you know that Donald Rumsfeld has never even heard of WTC 7?  Interesting...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwPoA-LlFtg




The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com