Section 31: I hope it still happens.

[Sci]

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.

Why would Sloan have claimed to Bashir that Section 31 is not accountable to the Federation government if that were untrue? His goal in that scene was to recruit Bashir into Section 31, yet telling Bashir that S31 was a rogue organization produced the exact opposite result of his goal. He had no rational incentive to so claim this if it is a lie.

Furthermore, Section 31's status as a rogue organization was backed up in "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges."

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.

Then why not just have them be a classified division of Starfleet Intelligence, answerable to the President and the chain of command but kept secret so as to be disavowed?

Also, if the Impossible Mission Force is truly a rogue agency that does not answer to the U.S. government, then Mission: Impossible is teaching us to idolize an anti-democratic criminal conspiracy.

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:

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

Kirk and Spock were still part of the chain of command and still answerable to the democratically-elected government of the Federation.

 

[Noname Given]

Why would Sloan have claimed to Bashir that Section 31 is not accountable to the Federation government if that were untrue? His goal in that scene was to recruit Bashir into Section 31, yet telling Bashir that S31 was a rogue organization produced the exact opposite result of his goal. He had no rational incentive to so claim this if it is a lie.

^^^
To see how far Bashir might actually be willing to go? IE - Sloan CAN'T reveal the real aspects of Section 31 until Bashir has become a real member - and Bashir will have to be 100% comfortable lying to others in the same way. It kind of defeats the purpose if you tell the secret before a recruit has fully committed.

 

[The Old Mixer]

"Evil" is such a simplistic label.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Lord Garth]

I think Section 31 wasn't a rogue organization (or as rogue) in the 23rd Century but became one (or more of one) when it went deeper underground afterwards. Some people keep forgetting the 120-year time difference between DSC's first two seasons and DS9. Something that was known at one point might not be known 120 years later. How much do any of us in 2022 really know about 1902? Chances are you have to look it up. And if the information is suppressed and/or classified, then good luck trying uncover it after 12 decades.

So I think the S31 of the 22nd and 23rd Centuries is not the S31 of the 24th Century. By the 24th Century, it's changed for the worse. Not too huge of a leap to make if you're actually willing to use your imagination to plug in the holes. Things change over time. An amazing concept, I know.

EDITED TO ADD: And (to hedge my bets) if it turns out that the Section 31 series actually takes place during the Picard time-frame, then they can always say that after what happened in DS9, Section 31 is now "Under New Management". So they can portray the DS9-Era Section 31 as badly as they want as long as the Section 31 this series would cover is different from that.

 

[Lord Garth]

As far as "the ends justify the means", that's another way of saying "by any means necessary". That's Darwinism. Kill or be killed. At the end of the day, most organisms and organizations want to survive. If that's "evil", then so be it. To quote McCoy in "The Enemy Within": "That's half of who we are."

"The ends justify the means" isn't as bad as is it's being made to sound. Data disobeyed Picard in "Redemption, Part II" and said "The ends cannot justify the means" despite what he did, but Picard forgave him because he uncovered Sela's trap. If Data just followed orders, she never would've been found out. And second, IRL, Malcolm X believed in "by any means necessary" and he was fighting for Civil Rights. He was fighting for the greater good. So, in both cases, it's an example of you're willing to do whatever it takes to do the right thing. Some people might say "two wrongs don't make a right" but I disagree in some circumstances. I think it depends on what you're ultimately willing to achieve and if the gain outweighs the cost. It's gray, but most things are.

When I buy most products, chances are I'm supporting Evil Corporations that have done horrible things. When I vote, chances are I'm voting for someone who's been financed by Evil Special Interests who have also done horrible things. I live in America where I'm benefitting off of living in a nation that was built on slavery and genocide. I live in a nation that exists because of evil. There's no getting away from it. No one is ideologically pure. Nothing is ideologically pure.

Star Trek is not ideologically pure. In "Arena" (TOS), the Metrons refer to Humanity as still being half-savage. So Strange New Worlds, early Discovery, and presumably Section 31 all take place during a time when Humanity itself is still "half-savage".

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

The difference between Kirk and Spock's cloaking device theft or Sisko's action to bring the Romulans into the war compared to how Section 31 operate, is that the Starfleet characters took unusually drastic measures because unusual circumstances called for it (and Sisko was tormented about it after it). It is in contrast to their normal behavior and they don't fall to the temptation of making a habit of it.

Then on the other hand you've got Section 31, who bravely make the tough choices no one else wants to make, and they make them all the time! They see Starfleet doing things like sending covert operatives disguised as Klingons into a party attended by Chancellor Gowron to flush out a Changeling and think 'But wouldn't it be better if we just committed genocide?'

Starfleet already does whatever it takes to save the day. They already do the cool spy stuff. But they try other things first if they can. Section 31 is cynicism and paranoia personified, every day is 'In the Pale Moonlight' day for them, and the Federation isn't so naive and passive that it can't exist without them.

 

[fireproof78]

I think the assumption that all Section 31 personnel are cynical and paranoid is my point. Assuming that they are all digustingly evil is just ridiculous.

ot too huge of a leap to make if you're actually willing to use your imagination to plug in the holes.

Since when do we use our imaginations in Star Trek?

 

[Lord Garth]

The difference between Kirk and Spock's cloaking device theft or Sisko's action to bring the Romulans into the war compared to how Section 31 operate, is that the Starfleet characters took unusually drastic measures because unusual circumstances called for it (and Sisko was tormented about it after it). It is in contrast to their normal behavior and they don't fall to the temptation of making a habit of it.

Then on the other hand you've got Section 31, who bravely make the tough choices no one else wants to make, and they make them all the time! They see Starfleet doing things like sending covert operatives disguised as Klingons into a party attended by Chancellor Gowron to flush out a Changeling and think 'But wouldn't it be better if we just committed genocide?'

Starfleet already does whatever it takes to save the day. They already do the cool spy stuff. But they try other things first if they can. Section 31 is cynicism and paranoia personified, every day is 'In the Pale Moonlight' day for them, and the Federation isn't so naive and passive that it can't exist without them.

I severely doubt every episode is going to be like "In the Pale Moonlight". If I turn out to be wrong, I'll say so. But I think it's more likely to be Star Trek's Mission: Impossible.

 

[Lord Garth]

Since when do we use our imaginations in Star Trek?

Point taken. I blame it on hardened arteries and calcification.

 

[dupersuper]

I think the assumption that all Section 31 personnel are cynical and paranoid is my point. Assuming that they are all disgustingly evil is just ridiculous.

Right, like all the misunderstood members of Hydra and AIM...

I severely doubt every episode is going to be like "In the Pale Moonlight". If I turn out to be wrong, I'll say so. But I think it's more likely to be Star Trek's Mission: Impossible.

That's not a Section 31 show, that's a Starfleet Intelligence show. I haven't seen much MI, but I think I would've heard of an episode in which the got innocent people locked up and certainly one in which they attempted genocide.

 

[Sci]

^^^
To see how far Bashir might actually be willing to go?

What does that mean?

IE - Sloan CAN'T reveal the real aspects of Section 31 until Bashir has become a real member - and Bashir will have to be 100% comfortable lying to others in the same way.

That makes no goddamn sense whatsoever. If Section 31 were a legitimate part of Starfleet, then there's no reason not to tell him that if your goal is to recruit him. Which it clearly is, because there is absolutely zero indication of any other goal in that or any subsequent scene.

It kind of defeats the purpose if you tell the secret before a recruit has fully committed.

If the existence of Section 31 as a legitimate part of Starfleet is a secret, then why did he even tell Bashir about its existence in the first place?

The 24th Century Section 31 is a rogue agency that's unaccountable to Starfleet or the Federation government. It is to Starfleet as Hydra is to SHIELD. That's just intrinsic to the story.

I think Section 31 wasn't a rogue organization (or as rogue) in the 23rd Century but became one (or more of one) when it went deeper underground afterwards. Some people keep forgetting the 120-year time difference between DSC's first two seasons and DS9. Something that was known at one point might not be known 120 years later. How much do any of us in 2022 really know about 1902? Chances are you have to look it up. And if the information is suppressed and/or classified, then good luck trying uncover it after 12 decades.

That's certainly possible, though I'm not sure by what process Section 31 would become rogue. Maybe the division was legally dissolved but former members decided to carry on outside the legitimate chain of command?

EDITED TO ADD: And (to hedge my bets) if it turns out that the Section 31 series actually takes place during the Picard time-frame, then they can always say that after what happened in DS9, Section 31 is now "Under New Management". So they can portray the DS9-Era Section 31 as badly as they want as long as the Section 31 this series would cover is different from that.

I severely doubt every episode is going to be like "In the Pale Moonlight". If I turn out to be wrong, I'll say so. But I think it's more likely to be Star Trek's Mission: Impossible.

That is certainly possible, but if that's the case, I'm not sure why they don't call it Star Trek: Starfleet Intelligence instead of Star Trek: Section 31.

 

[Lord Garth]

I'll kill two birds with one stone.

That's not a Section 31 show, that's a Starfleet Intelligence show. I haven't seen much MI, but I think I would've heard of an episode in which the got innocent people locked up and certainly one in which they attempted genocide.

You're right. You haven't seen much Mission: Impossible. Go watch it some time. It's on Paramount+.

I haven't seen every episode, but I've seen a lot of them. Most of them are either about stopping dictators of fictional countries or (in later seasons) disrupting whatever the mob is up to.

That is certainly possible, but if that's the case, I'm not sure why they don't call it Star Trek: Starfleet Intelligence instead of Star Trek: Section 31.

I don't know. We'll find out when we actually watch the show.

I'll remind people that Section 31 had nothing to do with "In the Pale Moonlight". If you want a better example, watch "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" where they do what they can to make sure a mole stays in place and the only consequence is one individual loses their career. Someone who they can't trust and even Admiral Ross says they can't trust.

We've only seen Section 31 during circumstances like The Dominion War and when Control tried to destroy the Galaxy. The Federation isn't facing threats like that all the time, so we don't actually know what Section 31 normally does when things like that aren't happening.
.
.
.

And did it not occur to anyone that there's a difference between seeing an organization sometimes on a TV show -- I remind you, a TV show -- and seeing it every week? Chances are they're going to show other sides to Section 31 so that it actually can sustain a TV series. Meaning, they're going to add to the original concept and modify it. How do I know? Because they've already added and modified. They'll continue to do the same once a show spotlights them on a regular basis. That's how television works.

Once we actually have the series in front of us, we'll probably have people here saying "That's not Section 31! Why didn't they just call it Starfleet Intelligence?" Guaranteed it's not going to be exactly what everyone collectively thinks it is, because these series are never exactly what people will think they are.

Look at the concept of Voyager. Beforehand you'd think it would be Starfleet and Maquis constantly at each other's throats and that they'd really have to rough it out there. Then it turned out it wasn't and they really didn't, respectively. Look at Discovery. It looked like it was going to be a prequel... then it turned out it's not. Two seasons in, they switched.

Look at DS9. At first you'd think it would just be a series about the station, Bajor, and the Cardassians. No one thought the series would eventually end up involving the entire quadrant. What the series became isn't what anyone thought it would be before anyone had even seen a single episode in 1992.

Yet we have people here who think they already know what Section 31 is going to be. News Flash: you don't.

This is just me, but usually I like to watch an episode of a series before I judge. I don't know. That's probably a crazy thing to do. How about it?

 

[Sci]

I'll remind people that Section 31 had nothing to do with "In the Pale Moonlight". If you want a better example, watch "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" where they do what they can to make sure a mole stays in place and the only consequence is one individual loses their career. Someone who they can't trust and even Admiral Ross says they can't trust.

Well, no, let's be clear: Senator Cretak almost certainly was either sentenced to life in a prison where she would be tortured for the rest of her (probably now much shorter) life, or she was sentenced to be executed.

It is true that Senator Cretak could not be "trusted" -- "trusted" to favor an alliance with the Federation if such an alliance were not in Romulus's best interests. Cretak was a patriot, not a Federation stooge. And she was innocent of the charges against her, and had done nothing to harm the Federation.

It is also false to say that Cretak's fate was the only consequence. Four years after the supposed Section 31 mole Koval was installed as Chair of the Tal Shiar, Shinzon of Remus assassinated the Romulan Senate and seized power in a coup d'etat before attempting to launch a genocidal attack on Earth and very nearly destroying the USS Enterprise, killing multiple Federation citizens, including Data. So either Koval was not really Section 31's man, or he was incompetent. Either way, Section 31's actions in "Inter Arma" almost led to the destruction of Earth.

We have literally never seen a Section 31 operation that did not produce horrific blowback.

Once we actually have the series in front of us, we'll probably have people here saying "That's not Section 31! Why didn't they just call it Starfleet Intelligence?"

It's a valid question! Why heroify an anti-democratic criminal conspiracy instead of a democratically-accountable agency?

Look at the concept of Voyager. You'd think it would be Starfleet and Maquis at each other's throats. Then it wasn't.

And the show was all the poorer for completely dumping any conflict between Starfleet and Maquis and just having all the Maquis become good little Starfleeters.

 

[Lord Garth]

And the show was all the poorer for completely dumping any conflict between Starfleet and Maquis and just having all the Maquis become good little Starfleeters.

Keep reading, as I edited the post to include mentioning DS9.

 

[Sci]

In response to something added in your edit:

This is just me, but usually I like to watch an episode of a series before I judge. I don't know. That's probably a crazy thing to do. How about it?

Listen, Roger Ebert once said that it's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it. And that's true of TV too. Star Trek: Emperor Georgiou (as I would prefer to refer to the series until we find out its real name) might end up being a really amazing show.

But I have a problem with the fundamental premise as it has been presented so far.

 

[The Old Mixer]

FWIW, more than one classic M:I episode ended with an offscreen gunshot because the IMF had manipulated one foe into rubbing out the other.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Other times, somebody was just dragged away to an implied rubbing out.

 

[fireproof78]

Right, like all the misunderstood members of Hydra and AIM...

I would expect more positive possibly in a Star Trek show. I'm optimistic. I learned that somewhere...

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I'm not going to write Section 31 off without seeing what it is first, but I am kind of confused about the title. Are they going to try to rehabilitate the group after they were the villains in DS9, Enterprise, Into Darkness and basically Discovery? If so, why?

 

[fireproof78]

I'm not going to write Section 31 off without seeing what it is first, but I am kind of confused about the title. Are they going to try to rehabilitate the group after they were the villains in DS9, Enterprise, Into Darkness and basically Discovery? If so, why?

Because the essence of Trek is positive growth and change.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Let's hope it's set in the Picard era then!