That statement is insane. If a individual runs into the street and pulls a child from in front of a oncoming truck, the fact that the individual wasn't official authorized (and over sighted) to do so make their action wrong? The idea that the individual 's action could (and should) only be undertaken by a government employee is again insane. People will step forward without some sort of official instructions, if they see the need. Describing the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as genocide, or attempted genocide, is really stretching the meaning of the term. Hiroshima was the location of 2nd General Army headquarters, which was responsible for the defense of southern Japan. If the atomic bombings hadn't resulted in Japan's surrender, and there had been a Allied invasion of the southern most island of Kyushu, the 2nd Army would have been the one fighting the Allies. Hiroshima was a communications core (phone lines and telegraph). The rail lines in that part of Japan passed through the city. There were a large number of military warehouses located in the city. And it was a assembly and distribution area for military personal. In the case of Nagasaki, the vast majority of the city's work force was employed in war production. Four companies, two shipyards and two arms/munitions factories, employed approximately 90% of Nagasaki's work force. There were other smaller war production facilities as well. In this day of ready information, this persistent idea that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't military targets defies belief. Unless some other unusual event trigger a Japanese surrender, this time table is unlikely. Without the shock effect of the atomic bombings, following a allied invasion, conventional warfare would have (at least) extended into the summer of 1946. Resulting in heavy allied casualties. It was three bombs produced per month, not three months per bomb. And both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets. What you're actually getting is provable crap that by canon, they never have, they never did.. In some two centuries, S31 never tried to assume direct control of the Federation. Never eliminate the governing body of the Federation and placed themselves in direct power. That would be destroying the Federation, an organization that they (unofficially) protect. If they were going to do all these dastardly things Hartzilla2007, they've had two centuries. Where are the excesses against the Federation as a whole, if they're only thinking of themselves? Where? S31 saw the long range problem that was the Founders some three years in advance. And Starfleet Intelligence? Star Trek is a presentation of events, when were we presented with Starfleet Intelligence have such foresight? And I don't mean hypothetical they could have, when did Starfleet Intelligence see the problem coming years in advance? When it came to the Founder, they seem pretty inept. But on the positive side, Starfleet Intelligence is authorized. And other than those hundred, is the average Founder offspring also born ignorant of the great link and all the other knowledge of the existing adults? Or is the average Founder offspring basically born an adult? And are therefor fully aware and culpable of the Founder's deeds and acts? What makes you think that there are any "children" within the link? Fine. In that case Sci, Section 31 if fully authorized by the Federation Council. There is oversight of all their action and deed. The plan to infect the Founders was actually thought up by the Federation Intelligence Agency, which S31 is a classified part of. The problem with you basic statement there Sci, is the only reason to think S31 isn't accountable, is because Sloan said it. If we disbelieve the statement that S31 is looking after the Federation, then how can we not also disbelieve their statement about being unaccountable? Package deal. If Sloan was lying on one major point, then how can we believe anything he says. I don't. I trust them to be dishonest, that's part of what makes them so effective in protecting the Federation. The Federation is protected by honest people like Starfleet (who don't lie), and by dishonest people like S31 (who do). No, I'm saying that Great Britain would have been morally justified in killing the entirety of the Nazi leadership group. Genociding them, and them only, everyone of them, once the threat to Great Britain became clear. The Nazi leadership certainly saw themselves as a "ethnic and racial group," so genocide them. Just them. Simply a case of S31 correctly evaluating the situation years in advance.