Steelers running back Rashard Mendenhall is being criticized on social media sites for Twitter posts that question celebrations of the death of Osama bin Laden.
"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 ...," Mendenhall wrote in a post on Monday afternoon. "I believe in God. I believe we're ALL his children. And I believe HE is the ONE and ONLY judge."
When another Twitter poster suggested that bin Laden wasn't responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Mendenhall responded: "We'll never know what really happened. I just have a hard time believing a plane could take a skyscraper down demolition style."
Mendenhall has 14,240 followers on Twitter, a number that increased last night after word of his bin Laden comments spread. In his Twitter profile, Mendenhall describes himself as a "conversationalist and professional athlete."
The Steelers declined comment and Mendenhall couldn't be reached, but other Twitter members were quick to bash the 23-year-old running back, who is entering his fourth NFL season.
Within hours of the post, dozens of people weighed in, calling Mendenhall a "moron" and "idiot," among other names. A few posters, though, agreed with Mendenhall's assessment.
It wasn't the first time Mendenhall made a controversial Twitter post. In March, after Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson called the NFL labor situation "modern-day slavery," Mendenhall agreed.
"Anyone with knowledge of the slave trade and the NFL could say that these two parallel each other," he wrote.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.