Section 31: I hope it still happens.

[fireproof78]

To be fair to S31 we've had very limited and onesided exposure to them. We've seen far more rogue Starfleet Admirals than rogue S31 agents, but I don't think anyone would suggest the admiralty is villainous. With a little work they could create a sense of noble purpose for S31 akin to the SCP foundation: We die in the dark so that you may live in the light. Those other guys from before? They were just another example of the few bad apples that the Federation produces.

Indeed, and also the idea of someone coming in with aspirations to reform the program. After all, Section 31's stated goal of protecting the Federation is not villainous in it's intent. The execution leaves much to be desired but that doesn't mean that someone couldn't come in and view themselves in a heroic light.

 

[Harpsichord]

Indeed, and also the idea of someone coming in with aspirations to reform the program.

Exactly. This is what Ash Tyler was hinting at during the S2 finale so they've at least thought of this storyline, but I have to say I hope that we've seen the last of Ash. Nothing against the actor but if I have to hear his character lament the sacrifice he made not going with the 'love of his life' Michael Burnham my eyes are going to roll out of their sockets. Absolutely negative on-screen chemistry and I don't want to hear about it

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The execution leaves much to be desired but that doesn't mean that someone couldn't come in and view themselves in a heroic light.

How Section 31 (or anyone else, for that matter) "view themselves" is irrelevant.

Evil is evil. Whether or not they recognize themselves as such.

We've seen far more rogue Starfleet Admirals than rogue S31 agents,

Every member of Section 31 is, by definition, rogue.

 

[fireproof78]

How Section 31 (or anyone else, for that matter) "view themselves" is irrelevant.

Evil is evil. Whether or not they recognize themselves as such.

So everyone with Section 31 is evil? That's quite the assumption.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

So everyone with Section 31 is evil? That's quite the assumption.

Perhaps. But it's also realistic.

 

[fireproof78]

Perhaps. But it's also realistic.

Based upon...what, exactly? Joining Section 31 means you default to evil? That's incredibly strange.

 

[Harpsichord]

Every member of Section 31 is, by definition, rogue.

I guess by the original text of the Starfleet charter this is true. On screen evidence, though, certainly implies some level of Starfleet oversight, however off-the-books it might be. Not just Discovery either, which basically made S31 look like a part of Starfleet. In DS9 Admiral Ross sure knows a lot about what the unaccountable spy agency is up to for someone who isn't being briefed regularly.

 

[Char Kais]

How Section 31 (or anyone else, for that matter) "view themselves" is irrelevant.
Evil is evil. Whether or not they recognize themselves as such.

So everyone with Section 31 is evil?

Yes!
Section 31 people are "the end justifies the means" kinda guys (aka evil).

This stands in total opposition to "rule of law", "separation of powers", "checks and balances". You know, basic principles of free and open societies.

 

[fireproof78]

Yes!
Section 31 people are "the end justifies the means" kinda guys (aka evil).

This stands in total opposition to "rule of law", "separation of powers", "checks and balances". You know, basic principles of free and open societies.

Interesting. So no matter what a person who thinks protecting the Federation at all costs is evil? Does that make Admiral Ross and Sisko evil?

 

[Commander Troi]

Interesting. So no matter what a person who thinks protecting the Federation at all costs is evil? Does that make Admiral Ross and Sisko evil?

I think the problem comes in the "at all costs" part. Is there a line? If so, where?

 

[fireproof78]

I think the problem comes in the "at all costs" part. Is there a line? If so, where?

I agree that a line needs to be defined, perhaps drawn, at a certain point. More my larger point is this idea that is rather fallacious in it's estimation that everyone who joins with Section 31 is automatically evil. I am not saying Section 31 as an organization isn't evil because of the "at all costs" attitude. But, that doesn't mean that people who are recruited, who desire to protect the Federation from harm, are going to be evil, at least at first. They might be idealistic, or passionate about security, and increasing their desire to ensure defensive measures are in place. It's the same idea with Starfleet admirals. Do we honestly believe that all the admirals who signed up with Starfleet were always evil and were hoping to cause pain and destruction and have to be stopped by the heroes? Or did they start out as idealistic Starfleet officers who felt that they had limited choices and felt they had to do something?

When you create broad sweeping categories of "all people are evil" it makes me raise an eyebrow, and honestly limits the storytelling possibilities.

 

[Sci]

To be fair to S31 we've had very limited and onesided exposure to them. We've seen far more rogue Starfleet Admirals than rogue S31 agents, but I don't think anyone would suggest the admiralty is villainous.

The admiralty are part of a chain of command and are therefore answerable to the democratically-elected government of the United Federation of Planets. Section 31 -- at least the S31 of DS9 -- is not.

Exactly. This is what Ash Tyler was hinting at during the S2 finale so they've at least thought of this storyline, but I have to say I hope that we've seen the last of Ash.

I kind of hope we see Ash again, but I would reconcile the apparent contradiction between DIS's depiction of Section 31 as a legitimate part of Starfleet and DS9's depiction of it as a criminal conspiracy within Starfleet by depicting Ash as having discovered that the orders creating S31 were faked by Control, and integrating those Section 31 officers who obeyed him into Starfleet Intelligence.

So everyone with Section 31 is evil? That's quite the assumption.

I dunno if everyone in it is evil, but the organization itself is evil.

Interesting. So no matter what a person who thinks protecting the Federation at all costs is evil? Does that make Admiral Ross and Sisko evil?

Ross and Sisko are both part of the legitimate chain of command and therefore answerable to the democratically-elected government.

 

[Noname Given]

Every member of Section 31 is, by definition, rogue.

Not necessarily. Even Slone may just be putting up such an appearance and may not be as 'evil' as he appears.

For all we know, Section 31 has the full backing and sanction of B(OTH the Federation government and Starfleet. They are the IMPOSSIBLE MISSION FORCE (like the Desilu TV show that was produced and aired at the same time as the original Star Trek) of the Federation; and everything Slone has stated to non-Section 31 personnel allows Starfleet and the Federation to completely disavow and have complete and plausible deniability of their actions when they are exposed/caught.

The Federation and Starfleet have always done what they need to to protect themselves. In the 23rd century, we had teh events depicted in TOS S3 - "The Enterprise Incident" - where Captain Kirk was setup as the 'fall guy if things went bad:
http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/59.htm

Enterprise Medical Log, stardate 5027.3. Doctor Leonard McCoy recording. I'm concerned about Captain Kirk. He shows indications of increasing tension and emotional stress.
...
MCCOY [OC]: I can find no reason for the captain's behaviour, except possibly that we've been on patrol too long without relief and diversion. He has resisted all of my attempts to run a psychological profile on him.

SPOCK: If we had not crossed the Neutral Zone, on your order, you would not now need our opinions to support a decision which should never have had to be made.

MCCOY: Jim, you ordered us? You had no authority!

KIRK: Dismissed, Doctor.

MCCOY: Jim!

KIRK: I said dismissed.

COMMANDER: The matter of trespass into Romulan space is one of galactic import, a violation of treaties. Now I ask you simply, what is your mission here?

KIRK: Instrument failure caused navigational error. We were across the Neutral Zone before we realised it, then we were surrounded by your ships before we could get back.

COMMANDER: A starship? One of the Starfleet's finest vessels? You're saying instrument failure as radical as you suggest went unnoticed until you were well past the Neutral Zone?

KIRK: Accidents happen. Cut off back-up systems malfunction. We were due for overhaul two months ago.

COMMANDER: I see. But you were able to navigate with this malfunction?

KIRK: The error was corrected.

COMMANDER: But I doubt it'll clear you of espionage.

KIRK: We were not spying, Commander.

COMMANDER: Your language has always been most difficult for me, Captain. Perhaps you have another word for it.

KIRK: You're grossly mistaken if you think we were there

COMMANDER: Captain, if a Romulan vessel ventured far into Federation territory without good explanation, what would a
starbase commander do? You see, it works both ways. I hardly believe you are the injured party. Spock, come in.
(Spock and the guards enter.)

COMMANDER: The captain has made his statement.

SPOCK: I understand.

COMMANDER: I must admit some surprise on seeing you, Spock. We were not aware of Vulcans aboard the Enterprise.

SPOCK: Starfleet is not in the habit of informing Romulans of its ships' personnel.

COMMANDER: Quite so. Yet there are certain ships, certain officers, that are known to us. Your situation appears most interesting.

KIRK: What earns Spock your special interest?

COMMANDER: He is a Vulcan. Our forebears had the same roots and origins. Something you wouldn't understand, Captain. We can appreciate the Vulcans, our distant brothers. I have heard of Vulcan integrity and personal honour. There's a well-known saying, or is it a myth, that Vulcans are incapable of lying?

SPOCK: It is no myth.

COMMANDER: Then tell me truthfully now, by your honour as a Vulcan, what was your mission?

SPOCK: I reserve the privilege of speaking only when it will not violate my honour as a Vulcan.

COMMANDER: It is unworthy of a Vulcan to resort to subterfuge.

SPOCK: You're being clever, Commander. That is unworthy of a Romulan. It is not a lie to keep the truth to oneself.

COMMANDER: Then there is a truth here that remains unspoken.

KIRK: You've been told everything. There's nothing else to say.

COMMANDER: There is Mister Spock's unspoken truth. You knew of the cloaking device that we have developed. You
deliberately violated Romulan space with a blatant spy mission, by order of the Federation.

KIRK: We've been all through that, Commander!

COMMANDER: We have not even begun! There's no force that I can use on a Vulcan that will make him speak. That is a fact. But there are Romulan methods completely effective against humans and human weaknesses.

SPOCK: You would not resort to them, Commander. They would prove ineffective against the captain.

COMMANDER: Then they will leave him dead, or what might be worse than dead. But I will know your unspoken truths.

KIRK: Let her rant. There's nothing to say.

SPOCK: I cannot allow the captain to be further destroyed. The strain of command has worn heavily upon him. He's not been himself for several weeks.

KIRK: That's a lie!

SPOCK: As you can see, Captain Kirk is a highly sensitive and emotional person. I believe he has lost the capacity for rational decision.

KIRK: Shut up, Spock!

SPOCK: I'm betraying no secrets. The commander's suspicion that Starfleet ordered the Enterprise into the Neutral Zone is unacceptable. Our rapid capture demonstrates its foolhardiness.

KIRK: You filthy liar!

SPOCK: I am speaking the truth for the benefit of the Enterprise and the Federation. I say now and for the record, that Captain Kirk ordered the Enterprise across the Neutral Zone on his own initiative and his craving for glory.

KIRK: (having to be held back by the guards) I'll kill you, you filthy traitor! I'll kill you! I'll kill you!

SPOCK: He is not sane.

But, ultimately:

MCCOY: I left orders that no one come in here.

CHAPEL: But he's alive, alive!

MCCOY: Well now that you know it, you might as well assist me. Hand me the physiostimulator.

CHAPEL: But he was dead. Their doctors certified he was dead.

MCCOY: Spock gave him a nerve pinch to simulate death.

CHAPEL: Then Mister Spock isn't a traitor, and you knew that and you didn't

MCCOY: I didn't know it until I beamed aboard the Romulan ship. Jim and Spock were operating under Federation orders.
(The green light goes out as Kirk wakes up properly.)

KIRK: Oh. (sitting up) My neck feels like it's been twisted off.

MCCOY: That's the Vulcan death grip for you.

CHAPEL: There's no such thing as a Vulcan death grip.

KIRK: Ah, but the Romulans don't know that. Sure fooled the doctors.

MCCOY: You took a big chance they didn't start an autopsy.

KIRK: As far as the rest of the crew's concerned, I'm still dead.

CHAPEL:: Why?

KIRK: That's what this whole masquerade was about. To keep the Enterprise and the Federation off the hook.

MCCOY: So that if anything went wrong, you would be the one to blame.

^^^
So yeah, there's your "upstanding/forthright/" Federation for you. Hell, for all we know the intel about the new Romulan cloaking device and the whole plan was done with the HELP of Section 31 and it's operatives in the 23rd century. Guess many would consider Kirk and Spock 'evil' as they betrayed the inviolable principles of the Federation and Starfleet...oh, wait...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Not necessarily. Even Slone may just be putting up such an appearance and may not be as 'evil' as he appears.

I doubt it.

In any case, with a suggestion like that, there has to be evidence. Why should anyone believe that Section 31 is anything other than what it appears to be: a rogue organization that does whatever it wants and answers to NO ONE? What evidence is there for that? None, of course.

They are the IMPOSSIBLE MISSION FORCE (like the Desilu TV show that was produced and aired at the same time as the original Star Trek) of the Federation; and everything Slone has stated to non-Section 31 personnel allows Starfleet and the Federation to completely disavow and have complete and plausible deniability of their actions when they are exposed/caught.

The Federation already has a (legitimate) organization like that. It's called Starfleet Intelligence.

If SI can't get it done, it doesn't deserve to get done. It's as simple as that.

 

[Noname Given]

If SI can't get it done, it doesn't deserve to get done. It's as simple as that.

^^^
So then, Kirk and Spock are 'evil' too...got it.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^^^
So then, Kirk and Spock are 'evil' too...got it.

They were most likely acting on orders FROM Starfleet Intelligence.

 

[Noname Given]

They were most likely acting on orders FROM Starfleet Intelligence.

Or Section 31 - we don't know for sure do we?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Or Section 31 - we don't know for sure do we?

This couldn't have been a Section 31 operation, because it actually WORKED.

 

[Harpsichord]

In any case, with a suggestion like that, there has to be evidence. Why should anyone believe that Section 31 is anything other than what it appears to be: a rogue organization that does whatever it wants and answers to NO ONE? What evidence is there for that? None, of course.

They'd be pretty lousy spies if they left anything behind other than circumstantial evidence, half-truths, and misdirection!

I should make it clear that I'm not arguing that the Section 31 show needs to happen. I'm only thinking about how they might choose to portray S31 because it seems now that the show is happening. I'm not sure if it's because of 'Into Darkness' or something else but the producers seem dead set on using the S31 brand. So might as well try to figure out how they could even make it work.

The IMF example from @Noname Given is perfect. Why would anyone know about their operations that worked? These guys need to be at a level where they can hide their actions the from Tal-Shiar and the Obsidian Order. So their orders self-destruct 5 seconds after they receive them and the Federation will disavow their existence if they're caught. It makes them accountable while ensuring that the perception of them from DS9 is compatible.

 

[fireproof78]

I should make it clear that I'm not arguing that the Section 31 show needs to happen. I'm only thinking about how they might choose to portray S31 because it seems now that the show is happening. I'm not sure if it's because of 'Into Darkness' or something else but the producers seem dead set on using the S31 brand. So might as well try to figure out how they could even make it work.

Exactly. Star Trek is famous for being willing to engage in moral debates and addressing shades of gray rather than always having an absolutist answer. Declaring anyone who associates with Section 31 as evil strikes me as extreme, even for Star Trek fans.