mike is telling the truth

[Javalon]

Originally posted by bcollin1
<rushing to the booth to fill in the "Democrat" block>




And man...RC, I know you only said it in gest, but what the heck was that "let's have our ethnic/religious/etc backgrounds established" thing all about??

Yeah...does anyone have the key to this box?
I wonder what's in it.

At least Pandora didn't know what was in the box. I think we all have a good idea of the insanity that would break loose if this particular box were to be opened.

[SeaOfBlack0304]

Horseface tries to act smart and says:
"Many a man of integrity and honor have smoked a little pot from time-to-time. I have read many reports of studies showing that THC can not show up in a drug test through 2nd hand smoke. I'll take science over someone's word...for right now...and will untill he can prove otherwise. My main point is: smoking pot...does not eliminate someone from being a man of 'integrity and honor.'"

Fool, studies have shown that exposure to second-hand pot smoke CAN change the results on a drug test. Behold:

"It is possible that second hand [marijuana] smoke will raise someone to the 50 ng/mL level; however, *extreme* exposure is required. For instance, a closed car full of pot smokers and a non-smoker may render the non-smoker positive for both urinalysis and the hair test, provided that they are sealed in the car for a while."

Now, why is it not possible that Mike was with 3 or 4 other people, all of them smoking. Since it's pot, the windows are probably rolled up, and the smoke sealed in, probably for a while. Now, Mike didn't take a hit, but the man has to breath, and inhales all the second hand smoke as he does. That fits all the requirements said in the above paragraph, and he is more than likely innocent. The source is below:

http://www.neonjoint.com/passing_a_drug_test/detection_times.html

Also:

http://www.pass--drug--test.com/drugurinalysis.html

(Down near the halfway point)

There were more, but they all actually said the exact same thing as that above paragraph, so there must be some truth to it. Of course, there are also a couple that say it's not possible, but majority rules.

Mike won't be found guilty of anything, this will be cleared away and forgotten. All he has to do in his defense is say something like this, and unless the courts can prove otherwise, he's innocent. Innocent until proven guilty, my friends.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the message board, I rest my case.

[broncos_chick]

Re: Re: Re: mike is telling the truth

Originally posted by jake meffley
and people who know him enough to know that he doesnt smoke pot.

i agree that this situation looks bad for him, and i dont expect many will believe me, but this is not a guy who smokes pot. unfortunately, he was around people who were, and that was a bad choice, but it is hard for me to watch him get crucified by media and fans when i know him to be a man of integrity and honor.

jake

Haven't read all the posts on this thread, have no idea what waits further on down the page -- but I'm going to take the "wait and see" stance. Working in the field of law, experience has taught that it's always a good idea to wait till all the evidence is in. So this little chickie won't be crucifying Anderson -- but I do feel everyone has a right to know the full truth and not be put off by management or the media with excuses/stories/smoke and mirrors (pardon the pun).

[SeaOfBlack0304]

I can't think that drug tests, which are known to be imperfect, is solely enough evidence to find him guilty...wait, is he even being charged with anything in a court? lol

And how hard do you think it will be for him to prove that he wasn't smoking? All he has to do is get the people who were with him in the car to testify, that'll go a long way.

[broncos_chick]

Originally posted by ChiefsMang
Smoking weed does not damage anyone's character, Bronco or Chief. This really souldn't even be an issue. Now if it was steroids...

Exactly. Look at Romanowski ...

[broncos_chick]

Originally posted by jake meffley
if we were all republicans we'd have starving people in the streets, the rich getting richer, and be at war with some country threatening us with rocks for the end of time. that sounds like more of a nightmare than a dream.

jake

Wrong.

[Elway]

Bottom line, at this point I don't care. Obviously it was not a first offense. He shouldn't have been in a position to inhale second hand smoke if that's what has occured. The NFL won't reversi it's policy right or wrong, so we get Jake back, put Clinton in and let Droughns do the blocking, he has proved himself quite capable and Hape can spell him.

[Perry1977]

It is too bad that it has come to this, but I guess that is what he gets for riding around in Deltha O'neal's Impala...

[NYCHIEFSFAN]

Re: Re: Re: mike is telling the truth

Originally posted by jake meffley
i agree that this situation looks bad for him, and i dont expect many will believe me, but this is not a guy who smokes pot.

Anderson, 30, has violated the league's substance-abuse policy at least two times.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~86~1760322,00.html

Jake, you of all people should know the consequences of Bandura's Social Learning Theory. One doesn't have to experience a crime to know that the crime is illegal. No one should be guilty by association, but many of us have been judged by the friends we keep. Why would a prominent NFL player associate with people who are exhibiting illicit behavior? Obviously, this isn't the first time Mike has been down this road and to me, he sounds scared. One more negative visit by the Pissman can end his career, permanently.

"The (league) policy states, `A player is responsible for what is in their bodies,'" NFL spokesman Steve Alic said.

"I'm very saddened by the decision made by the NFL," Anderson, who was not available for further comment, said in his statement. "I know this has a tremendous negative impact on my team, my coaches, my family and fans. I tested positive for marijuana use at a level that was so low it would have been deemed a negative test by the state of Colorado.

Sometimes addicts justify drug use because of a crisis, job pressure, or a family catastrophe that produces temporary anxiety or depression. In Anderson's case, his justification is second-hand smoke at a "level that was so low". You feel sorry for the guy, but at the same time, he got what he deserved. If he wasn't smoking pot and only inhaled second hand smoke, then he was hanging around the wrong people who could put his career in jeopardy. I question Mike's decision making process.

Once bitten, twice shy.

[goodluv4Broncos]

Re: Re: Re: Re: mike is telling the truth

Originally posted by BroncoManiac_69
Jake, I believe you (and Mike) 100% but the general public will not. Unless you know Mike personally (and it appears you do) it is hard for anyone to know what to believe.

I believe Mike can get through this. He has been one of my favorite players since Terrell left.

Good Luck Mike and see ya in 4 weeks.

GO BRONCOS!!

BroncoManiac have you ever been at a party or lets just say around someone who was smoking marijuana lets name it for what it is grass, weed, good enough? Well if you had and you were at your friends house and some of the people were toking up on a joint and the smoke was all in the air and heck you inhaled what was in the room, well dam that makes you a weed smoker by proxy. Well hell if the General public want to persecute family's because they smoke cigarettes around there children and believe that 2nd hand smoke can effect you then why is it so hard to believe that Mr Anderson really doesn't smoke pot, and anyway they have that 1st time law there in Colo 1st offense they pat you on the hand give you a six month deferred sentence and unassisted probation so the way I see it, and the general public sees it, he's good to go back to the locker room and suit up to play football illregardless of if he smoked it or not. I say he is innocent and I am of the general public and I'm not gonna crucify him. Oh and yes he put himself in that situation but is he a mind reader? Did he actually know that some of the people or all of them were pot smokers? If he wasn't told then he had no way of knowing, he's not a liar as long as he has been in Colo and no blemishes on him, Nah, he is a innocent man, give luv to him God knows he sure gives us luv everytime he carries the ball. Mr Anderson I would give my vote you're innocent and if the courts don't, then we will pardon you!!!!!!

[thesaint]

Mikes a good guy, and I HOPE hes not guilty, but like the previous posts have said...this isnt the first time.

The second hand smoke alibi is looking very thin. Anorexic, in fact.

And even if it is true.....who is he rolling with thats smoking so much its making HIM fail the drug test????
He's making poor decisions either way.

[goodluv4Broncos]

Re: Re: Re: Re: mike is telling the truth

Originally posted by NYCHIEFSFAN
Anderson, 30, has violated the league's substance-abuse policy at least two times.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~86~1760322,00.html

Jake, you of all people should know the consequences of Bandura's Social Learning Theory. One doesn't have to experience a crime to know that the crime is illegal. No one should be guilty by association, but many of us have been judged by the friends we keep. Why would a prominent NFL player associate with people who are exhibiting illicit behavior? Obviously, this isn't the first time Mike has been down this road and to me, he sounds scared. One more negative visit by the Pissman can end his career, permanently.

"The (league) policy states, `A player is responsible for what is in their bodies,'" NFL spokesman Steve Alic said.

"I'm very saddened by the decision made by the NFL," Anderson, who was not available for further comment, said in his statement. "I know this has a tremendous negative impact on my team, my coaches, my family and fans. I tested positive for marijuana use at a level that was so low it would have been deemed a negative test by the state of Colorado.

Sometimes addicts justify drug use because of a crisis, job pressure, or a family catastrophe that produces temporary anxiety or depression. In Anderson's case, his justification is second-hand smoke at a "level that was so low". You feel sorry for the guy, but at the same time, he got what he deserved. If he wasn't smoking pot and only inhaled second hand smoke, then he was hanging around the wrong people who could put his career in jeopardy. I question Mike's decision making process.

Once bitten, twice shy.

Why would any of them who carry that status quo actually get hooked on drugs and not just a little pee test that says you have a trace in your system, Who Mr Anderson hangs out with is no concern of anybody's and certainly not yours. You could have a flat tire and a motorist came by and gave you a helping hand say a ride to a nearby service station to get gas or to call a tow truck and this motorist by the way had been smoking pot and he inhaled it now would you still say Mr Anderson shouldn't have put hisself in that position? Who the hell do you think you are? Just because he is of notoriety doesn't give us the right to say what he should and shouldn't do with his spare time or like you fans from other cities who just love to see doom and gloom for the Broncos well he's innocent, had it been Trent Green last Sunday evening after there little party they had you'd be saying they are lying on him he's to good, well get a grip and question your decision making process for even attempting to write such rubbish. His career as you would hope it to be is not in jepoardy as you seem to think. I wonder if your brother was a pot smoker would you consider yourself around the wrong people
and 1 more question what is jeopardy when you write your post courtesy of Denver Broncos message boards it profides a dictionary for your misspelled words it is underlined and made into a link use it then you won't look totaly rediculous, trying to down a man who is already down. A Bronco Fan from the heart, that is who I am. You should wish you had the fine and upstanding men on the teams you support.

[thesaint]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: mike is telling the truth

Originally posted by goodluv4Broncos
when you write your post courtesy of Denver Broncos message boards it profides a dictionary for your misspelled words it is underlined and made into a link use it then you won't look totaly rediculous

I just dont know what to say to this...

[goodluv4Broncos]

Originally posted by broncos_chick
Exactly. Look at Romanowski ...

broncos_chick I hear ya, now if it were steroids dam I'd kind of be mad, in this case I have to differ with everyone else, if second hand smoke and marajuana can give you cancer then why can't it get in your lungs and body to give you a dirty p-test g/f do you really think they know what they are talking about I don't. I won't crucify Mike my thumbs are up for him. He's innocent, and yeah you right again Romo no mind no brain and then where does he find a thought to fight not only his opponents but his team mates too, now some one should take that down a notch, Romo tried to hurt Portis and almost succeeded they should ban him from football, Romo he's a druggie and dam an atempted murderer too he almost killed his teammate and only got a 5,000 fine and was his career in jepoardy I don't think so!!!!! He uses steroids for a fact
he had to leave Denver for substance abuse and his Dr lost his license for writing the scripts for Phentermine bad azz steroid and weight control pill so hey they all do it and it should not be made public.

[wesuckrealbad]

The real travesty is that here is another person being judged for doing something that is admittedly illegal, but is relativley harmless compared to lots of other legal drugs that anyone can buy anywhere.

Mike is now having to maybe lie, decieve, be scrutinized, debated about, lose money, lose respect, lose credibility, etc... just because he smoked a bit of pot. Big deal. Are the only people in this country that smoke pot are The Grateful Dead, Willie Nelson, and Woodie Harrelson? I don't think so.

And I know, I know. He signed contracts saying he wouldn't do it, and he knew he shouldn't, and on and on and on. But I'm questioning the notion of legalization more than anything. All this scrutinization for smoking a plant that comes straight out of the ground.