On Monday morning, no one was rooting for whomever it was that killed an Irvine basketball coach and her fiancé. But by Thursday morning, things had changed. A lengthy, rambling but shockingly lucid "manifesto" surfaced explaining why the suspected killer and disgraced ex-LAPD cop was going on a killing rampage that has so far claimed three lives. Dorner claims that he was targeting a corrupt and bloodthirsty law enforcement agency—that he said hadn't improved since the days of the Rodney King Riots or the Rampart Scandal—earned him fans.

There are a couple of Facebook pages dedicated to Dorner, including We Are All Chris Dorner, which states: "Christopher John Dorner is the victim of a manhunt and smear campaign. 5 years ago he was fired from the LAPD for seeking to expose corruption within it..." There's the Christopher Dorner Appreciation Society, which posts pictures of police brutality and images from the Rodney King Riots in 1992. It says, "This man's life was ruined for fighting back against a racist culture. We here at C.D.A.S. will always remember his story."

Discussions about ethical issues, not to mention attempts to encourage ethical behavior, are constantly derailed by the invocation of common misstatements of ethical principles. Some of these are honest misconceptions, some are intentional distortions, some are self-serving rationalizations, and some, upon examination, simply make no sense at all.

............

3. Consequentialism, or “It Worked Out for the Best”

The ethical nature of an act must be evaluated when it is done, and not based on its results. Consequentialism is an open invitation to extreme “the ends justify the mean” conduct, where even cruel and illegal conduct becomes “ethical” because good consequences happen to arise out of it, even when the good was completely unintended or unpredictable. ......

4. “If it isn’t illegal, it’s ethical.”

..........

10. The King’s Pass

One will often hear unethical behavior excused because the person involved is so important, so accomplished, and has done such great things for so many people that we should look the other way, just this once. This is a terribly dangerous mindset, because celebrities and powerful public figures come to depend on it. Their achievements, in their own minds and those of their supporters and fans, have earned them a more lenient ethical standard. This pass for bad behavior is as insidious as it is pervasive, and should be recognized and rejected when ever it raises its slimy head. In fact, the more respectable and accomplished an individual is, the more damage he or she can do through unethical conduct, because such individuals engender great trust. Thus the corrupting influence on the individual of The King’s Pass leads to the corruption of other others through…

11. The Dissonance Drag

Cognitive dissonance is an innately human process that can muddle the ethical values of an individual without him or her even realizing that it is happening. The most basic of cognitive dissonance scenarios occurs when a person whom an individual regards highly adopts a behavior that the same individual deplores. The gulf between the individual’s admiration of the person (a positive attitude) and the individual’s objection to the behavior (a negative attitude) must be reconciled. The individual can lower his or her estimation of the person, or develop a rationalization for the conflict (the person was acting uncharacteristically due to illness, stress, or confusion), or reduce the disapproval of the behavior.

This is why misbehavior by leaders and other admired role models is potentially very harmful on a large scale: by creating dissonance, it creates a downward drag on societal norms by validating unethical behavior. Tortured or inexplicable defenses of otherwise clearly wrong behavior in public dialogue are often the product of cognitive dissonance.

12. The Saint’s Excuse: “It’s for a good cause”
..............

25. “The Favorite Child” Excuse

What my guy did is OK, because your guy did it.
............

27. The Revolutionary’s Excuse: “These are not ordinary times.”

An argument for those who embrace “the ends justify the means”—but only temporarily, mind you!—the Revolutionary’s excuse has as long and frightening a pedigree as any of the rationalizations here. Of course, there is no such thing as “ordinary times.” This rationalization suggests that standards of right and wrong can and should be suspended under “special” circumstances, always defined, naturally, by those who defy laws, rules, and societal values. Their circular logic results in their adversaries feeling justified in being equally unethical, since times in which the other side engages in dishonesty, cheating, cruelty, and more is, by definition, extraordinary.

The inevitable result is a downward spiral of conduct, until unethical behavior is the norm. Ironically, the rationalization that “these are not ordinary times” no longer is necessary at that point. Unethical conduct has become ordinary, the new normal. This is, it is fair to say, the current state of American politics.
...............

30. The Troublesome Luxury: “Ethics is a luxury we can’t afford right now”

....In a true crisis, ethical values are often the only thing standing between us and catastrophic misconduct in the throes of desperation and panic; they aren’t luxuries, they are life-lines. When you hear yourself saying, “I’ll do anything to fix this! Anything!” it is a warning, and the ethics alarm needs to start ringing hard. Grab those ethical values, and hold on to them. They are the last thing you can afford to be without at such times.

31. The Unethical Role Model: “He/She would have done the same thing”

This is a fantasy rationalization, and therefore a wonderfully versatile one. Just pick the great, famous and admired man or woman who you think would be most likely to engage in the wrongful conduct you are considering, and you will immediately feel good about it......

http://ethicsalarms.com/rule-book/unethical-rationalizations-and-misconceptions/

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Washington, D.C. – US Senator Ron Wyden, a senior member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, made the following statement today regarding a Justice Department paper entitled “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Against a U.S. Citizen Who Is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qa’ida or An Associated Force” which was made public yesterday by NBC News:

“As I and ten other senators told the President yesterday, if individual Americans choose to take up arms against the United States, there will clearly be some circumstances in which the President has the authority to use lethal force against those Americans, just as President Lincoln had the authority to use force against the Confederate Army during the Civil War. At the same time, it is vitally important for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how the executive branch interprets this authority, so that Congress and the public can decide whether the President’s power to deliberately kill American citizens is subject to appropriate limitations and safeguards. Every American has the right to know when their government believes that it is allowed to kill them.

“The Justice Department memo that was made public yesterday touches on a number of important issues, but it leaves many of the most important questions about the President’s lethal authorities unanswered. Questions like ‘how much evidence does the President need to decide that a particular American is part of a terrorist group?’, ‘does the President have to provide individual Americans with the opportunity to surrender?’ and ‘can the President order intelligence agencies or the military to kill an American who is inside the United States?’ need to be asked and answered in a way that is consistent with American laws and American values. This memo does not answer these questions.

“I will continue to press the Administration to provide Congress with any and all legal opinions that outline the President’s authority to use lethal force against Americans, and I will not be satisfied until I have received them. I have not yet received an official response to the letter than I sent to Deputy National Security Advisor Brennan on this topic three weeks ago, but I look forward to raising the issue with him again at his nomination hearing this Thursday.”

The letter that Senator Wyden and ten other Senators sent to President Obama regarding these legal opinions can be found here. The letter that Senator Wyden sent to Deputy National Security Advisor Brennan, which includes detailed questions about the President’s lethal authorities, can be found here. And the letter that Senator Wyden sent to Attorney General Holder on this topic can be found here.

According to a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) between El Paso Electric Company and First Solar, electricity will be sold from First Solar’s thin-film solar panels to El Paso Electric Company for 5.8 cents per kWh.....

The highly unusual thing about this is that the average residential retail cost of electricity in the United States is 11.4 cents per kWh, which is twice as much as the price at which this power plant will be producing electricity!

(The resulting $0.0579, or six cents, per kWh is less than half the average price of energy generated by new coal-fired power stations (12.8c/kWh) Read more: http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/us--thin-film-solar-energy-sells-cheaper-than-coal-fired_100010043/#ixzz2Jx3NDAaO)

Also, the typical price of thin-film solar power is 16.3 cents per kWh, which is 2.8 times more.

Clean Technica (http://s.tt/1zjUZ)
Read more at http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/03/thin-film-solar-power-to-be-sold-for-less-than-coal/#5XFl9uoaqTU9t98h.99