RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,901
Posts: 5,387,368
Members: 24,717
Currently online: 555
Newest member: teriankhoka

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Cumberbatch To Voice Khan
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Shaun And Ed On Phineas and Ferb
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

New Ships Coming From Official Starships Collection
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Trek Stars Take On Ice Bucket Challenge
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Retro Review: Profit and Lace
By: Michelle on Aug 16


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Deep Space Nine

Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 11 2013, 02:48 PM   #1
DS9forever
Fleet Captain
 
Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

As there have been a few complaints about the spoiler in this thread being visible when one's mouse is pointed at the thread (yes, I know), I'll take the liberty of putting said spoiler in the appropriate tags.

!

Last edited by Orac Zen; May 13 2013 at 07:58 AM. Reason: Spoiler visible in tooltip; tags added.
DS9forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 03:05 PM   #2
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

I was really suprised that they actually used Section 31. This film was absolutely jam-packed with Trek lore and references.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 06:05 PM   #3
lvsxy808
Rear Admiral
 
lvsxy808's Avatar
 
Location: London
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

I was surprised not so much at the mention of Section 31, but at the admiral talking about it quite as openly as he did. Perhaps he didn't think it was a problem because he didn't intend Kirk and Spock to come back from their mission, but still, if Section 31 is supposed to be the ultra-secretest of secret organizations, you don't just blurt out that they exist where anyone can overhear you. It makes me think the writers tossed it in so we'd be happy with a DS9 reference without really understanding what it is that makes Section 31 what it is.

BTW, are we supposed to assume that the admiral was actually a member of Section 31 himself? He mostly came off as your average Insane Admiral TM, but actively trying to start a war because you believe it's inevitable but you've got genetically engineered supermen on your side so you'll win anyway does kind of sound like a S31 thing. And the secret base and secret starship with its non-official Starfleet uniforms also fits.

.
__________________
DS9-R fans! Want to know what happened after The Soul Key?

Read Deep Space Nine, Season 10
All 22 eps available to read on-screen or download and keep!
lvsxy808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 06:49 PM   #4
GameOn
Lieutenant Commander
 
GameOn's Avatar
 
Location: UK
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

I haven't seen the movie yet but it seems like they're just randomly throwing elements of Star Trek into the new movies without understanding their context in an attempt to make it a Star Trek movie. Section 31 was always out of place in the utopian future of Star Trek and I think it's a mistake to use it outside of the morally ambiguous setting of DS9.
GameOn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 07:46 PM   #5
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

GameOn wrote: View Post
I haven't seen the movie yet but it seems like they're just randomly throwing elements of Star Trek into the new movies without understanding their context in an attempt to make it a Star Trek movie. Section 31 was always out of place in the utopian future of Star Trek and I think it's a mistake to use it outside of the morally ambiguous setting of DS9.
It makes sense if you consider Section 31 an organization out to only protect the interests of Earth. Think about it? In DS9 and ENT we've only known Section 31 members to be human. The fact that they are in the "Earth" Starfleet Charter before the Federation was founded means that throughout history they've always been there. DS9 put a name on such an organization but with how easily and mysteriously Sloan was able to slip in and out of DS9. It's not impossible to think this organization uses not just methods, but technology that Starfleet legally agrees not to use. Cloaking devices etc.

Morals in Starfleet havent't always been clear cut things. Look at the war nearly started in TUC, phasing cloak from TNG Pegasus, the theft of a Romulan cloaking device by invasion of the neutral zone by Kirk and Spock, and of course the virus used on the Founders. Starfleet Command/Admiralty was either behind or had a hand in everyone of those incidents. Unless caught red handed, holding a smoking gun in view of others. The perpetrators (Starfleet Comm) rarely face repercussions.

In this new timeline, the pollution of history with technology 125 years from the future can change the balance of power. Klingons had 25 years to study the Narada, while Starfleet only had censor scans to go by. I haven't seen the movie yet but from the spoilers. Section 31 being so casually name dropped seems that earth is still in a heightened state of security. The Nero incident was only 1 year ago by Into Darkness canon. Like America's terror threat level system.
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 08:38 PM   #6
GameOn
Lieutenant Commander
 
GameOn's Avatar
 
Location: UK
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

I'm talking thematically Section 31 doesn't fit within Star Trek outside of the morally ambiguous setting of DS9. It's made pretty clear that Section 31 is a rogue organisation that does what it wants without the consent or approval of Starfleet. Small numbers of rogue officers like in "The Undiscovered Country", "The Pegasus" and "Paradise Lost" do not represent Starfleet. The only time Starfleet does morally questionable things is in the event of war "In the Pale Moonlight", or when they're engaged in hostilities with another race "The Enterprise Incident". Also the Klingons having the Narada for 25 years isn't canon because it's from a deleted scene.

Last edited by GameOn; May 11 2013 at 08:56 PM.
GameOn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 12:10 AM   #7
free2131
Ensign
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

GameOn wrote: View Post
The only time Starfleet does morally questionable things is in the event of war "In the Pale Moonlight", or when they're engaged in hostilities with another race "The Enterprise Incident".
Just keep telling yourself that...
free2131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 04:51 AM   #8
JirinPanthosa
Commodore
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

Also when making territory arrangements with bordering dictatorships.

But I agree that Section 31 only makes sense within DS9's creative vision for the show, and not for any other incarnation of the series.

But NuTrek is a separate franchise, so it can use whatever thing from the show it wants.
JirinPanthosa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 05:28 AM   #9
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

GameOn wrote: View Post
I'm talking thematically Section 31 doesn't fit within Star Trek outside of the morally ambiguous setting of DS9. It's made pretty clear that Section 31 is a rogue organisation that does what it wants without the consent or approval of Starfleet. Small numbers of rogue officers like in "The Undiscovered Country", "The Pegasus" and "Paradise Lost" do not represent Starfleet. The only time Starfleet does morally questionable things is in the event of war "In the Pale Moonlight", or when they're engaged in hostilities with another race "The Enterprise Incident". Also the Klingons having the Narada for 25 years isn't canon because it's from a deleted scene.

The Undiscovered Country: Assassination of a Klingon pacifist, attempted assassination of the President of the Federation, to cause galactic scale war between the Klingons and the Federation. Orchestrated by Admiral Cartwright, Colonel West of Starfleet, and General Chang and Ambassador Nanclus of the Klingon and Romulan empires. While Chang was down for a war. Let's not forget it was 2 Starfleet personell who killed Gorkon and several Klingons, Lt. Valeris who collaborated and set Kirk up to take the fall for the crime, and Colonel West himself who was going to shoot the President of the Fed. The roundtable scene makes it clear not all StarFleet Command is comfortable with peace with the Klingons. Kirk himself was ready to let them all die and he probably wouldn't have objected to a war with them. We can assume Cartwright had other supporters in the Admiralty and among the Captains but it was his operation he undertook.

TNG Pegasus: The development of a phasing cloak was an illegal experiment carried out by a then Captain Pressman. The experiment went awry and the crew, experiment, and ship were lost. Years later Picard found out there was a token inquiry in to the loss of the Pegasus but was never truly investigated. The fact that Pressman was a captain at the time and later promoted to Admiral means the phasing cloak experiment was handed down to him from a higher authority than he had at the time as a captain. When exposed and facing court martial, he tells Picard he has a lot of friends at StarFleet Command. He likely faced no repercussions or dishonorable discharge for his conduct.


DS9 Paradise Lost and Homefront: was a Coup d'état by Admiral Leyton to turn Earth in to a police state to protect against the extreme infiltration threat the Dominion posed. While Leyton's plot was foiled and he did resign. We do know this is when Odo was infected with the morphogenic virus. Odo was on Starfleet property the entire time and only interacted with Starfleet scientist in developing ways to detect changelings. I'm sure someone at the admiralty OKed the use of the virus to Section 31, and Odo was infected. They were considerate enough to ensure Odo himself would not develop the symptoms but unforseen events by Starfleet caused him to.

TNG Insurrection: We have Admiral Doughtery working with Dominion allies to relocate 600 people off a planet with mutagenic healing properties. Through use of duck blind missions, a federation holodeck ship with a cloaking device (cloaking tech is still a violation right), and agreeing with Ru'afo to send ships to "stop" the Enterprise. Doughtery was willing to destroy the flagship and his crew for the particles. His plan failed when the knowledge that the Son'a and Ba'ku were the same race surfaced. Explaining that to Starfleet Command; who knew every detail about this mission expect that one would be a hard one to defend to other Federation planets and new entries to the Fed. Not something you want in the Federation Brochure about your wonderful utopian society.

DS9 In the Pale Moonlight : Ends justify the means scenario that we never see the repercussions of. Sisko weighs the options and decides that involving the Romulans in the Dominion War is the only way to preserve the Federation. He has Garak forge a false holodeck simulation and assassinate a Romulan delegate. Sisko at the end of his log says he can live with the decision. However we never learn Romulus' body count for their involvement, and Sisko "dies" soon after the conclusion of the war. So we never see him wrestle with his conscience or reflect on his decision. I doubt he would've remained as "Defiant" as he was 'In The Pale Moonlight' some time after 'What You Leave Behind'.

DS9 Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges: Secures in stone that StarFleet Command is not just playing footsie with Section 31, they are sharing a bed with them. Admiral Ross reciting the latin phrase at Bashir to justify his and Sloan's actions sums up that anything goes as long as it's to protect the Federation. Sisko, Doughtery, Leyton, Sloan, Pressman and Valeris all uttered the same sentiment when confronted with their actions. It doesn't make them wrong, it just makes them as dirty as other empires we see in the Trekverse.

I could continue but I think I've made my point. Starfleet Command and Admirals are bent. Hell look at my icon Janeway. All the shady things she did in the Delta Quadrant and she's promoted to Vice Admiral less than a year after Voyager got back to Earth. It's like you have to bend the rules in order to get promoted to the Admiral Nechayev or Admiral Satie level of dickery. Also a special shout out to Admiral Jameson for his bent use of the Prime Directive to insight a 40 year civil war.
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2013, 12:07 AM   #10
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

King Daniel wrote: View Post
I was really suprised that they actually used Section 31.
It completely shocked me! I'm sure I posted somewhere that this would never happen I gasped when I heard it. And I love it, having always been a huge fan of the Section 31 idea, the ultimate FU to Roddenberry's evolved humans.

Oh I am dying to see this movie again now..
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2013, 03:24 AM   #11
JirinPanthosa
Commodore
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

@AllstarEnterprise

Although you could say, all those examples are examples of corrupt individuals, not systemic problems.

There is, at least in DS9, clearly a systemic problem of the passive tolerance of Section 31. But you certainly can't blame the average Starfleet officer.
JirinPanthosa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2013, 05:22 AM   #12
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

Fish rots from the head. The Admiralty is the top of Starfleet. They give the orders and directives. I was making the bigger point that Admirals in Starfleet are shady when their is no galactic war going on. During such extreme circumstances like the Dominion War no one (we the audience) should act surprised the Admiralty signed off on and or approved questionable actions by Section 31 in the dark out of public view.
Quoting Odo from DS9 "Dogs of War": "Interesting, isn't it? The Federation claims to abhor Section 31's tactics, but when they need the dirty work done, they look the other way. It's a tidy little arrangement, wouldn't you say?"

We shouldn't be surprised by Admiral Marcus' actions to start a war with the Klingons using John Harrison. While I don't fault the everyday officer. You look at captains like Sisko, Picard, The Kirks, Jellico and Maxwell who have all been on the front lines when the shit hits the fan and compare them to the admiralty they serve under and you have wonder. Is there a culture of doing whatever is dictated necessary to protect Earth and the Federation in the admiralty of StarFleet? In DS9 Admiral Ross retorted Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges, "In times of war the laws falls silent" to Bashir when he was confronted on his actions. You can make a case that the Admiralty of StarFleet operates on that principle in war time, and another latin phrase in peace time. Si vis pacem, para bellum, "If you want peace, prepare for war".
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2013, 06:28 AM   #13
Bry_Sinclair
Commodore
 
Bry_Sinclair's Avatar
 
Location: Along the border of Talarian space
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

I would have been so much happier with the film if John Harrison had just been a kick-ass S31 operative with access to loads of classified technology, rather than what they turned him into (I actually groaned in displeasure in the cinema when the reveal was made).
__________________
Avatar: Captain Susanna Leijten, U.S.S. Silverfin NCC-4470, Border Service Third Cutter Squadron
Manip by: FltCpt. Bossco (STPMA)
Bry_Sinclair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2013, 01:20 PM   #14
Tosk
Rear Admiral
 
Tosk's Avatar
 
Location: On the run.
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

Here's a DS9 reference that probably doesn't really exist...I'm reeeeeally stretching on this:


Last edited by Tosk; May 14 2013 at 12:01 AM.
Tosk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13 2013, 08:36 PM   #15
TheRoyalFamily
Commodore
 
TheRoyalFamily's Avatar
 
Re: Into Darkness DS9 references (SPOILERS)

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Starfleet Command and Admirals are bent. Hell look at my icon Janeway. All the shady things she did in the Delta Quadrant and she's promoted to Vice Admiral less than a year after Voyager got back to Earth. It's like you have to bend the rules in order to get promoted to the Admiral Nechayev or Admiral Satie level of dickery. Also a special shout out to Admiral Jameson for his bent use of the Prime Directive to insight a 40 year civil war.
It's like they leave the idealists out captaining starships all on their lonesome, while they make the pragmatists admirals...
__________________
You perceive wrongly. I feel unimaginable happiness wasting time talking with women. I'm that type of human.
TheRoyalFamily is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.