Section 31

[Greg Cox]

Section 31 doesn't have any of that. In the most literal sense, Section 31 does whatever it wants. Am I and @Sci the only ones who see how dangerous that is?

Oh, it's definitely dangerous. That's why, as a plot device, it lends itself to conflict and intrigue and moral dilemmas. Section 31 is supposed to be a disturbingly shady operation, which is why it's seldom good news when they get involved in a situation.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And it's also important to point out that while Section 31's existence may be part of the Earth Starfleet charter, it's not part of the Federation Starfleet charter. Despite the similarity in names, the two Starfleets are NOT the same organization.

So the minute the Federation Starfleet came into existence, it not only negated the existence of the Earth Starfleet, but also that of Section 31.

FWIW.

 

[KelisThePoet]

In fiction, it's easy to set up a situation in which the heroes must either act unconscionably or be destroyed, in which the only choice is between ethics and safety.

Many people assert that these fictions are more realistic, that reality gives us this stark choice, as well. I've never been inclined to agree. And while Talaxians are a fiction, my own view of reality lines up well with an old Talaxian proverb: when the road before you branches in two, take the third way.

 

[Sci]

At least the CIA is a legitimate part of the United States government. It has Congressional oversight, and is responsible to the President.

Section 31 doesn't have any of that. In the most literal sense, Section 31 does whatever it wants. Am I and @Sci the only ones who see how dangerous that is?

You rang?

Section 31 protect against threats. They just do it behind the scenes.

No, they claim that they protect the Federation against threats from behind the scenes. But they operate without any form of democratic accountability; they do not report to the Federation President (in fact, according to "Extreme Measures," they actively spied on the President by placing an agent in President Jaresh-Inyo's Cabinet); they do not report to the Federation Council; they don't take orders from any elected officials; they target whomsoever they want; they operate without any system of democratic accountability.

Frankly, Section 31 is to the Federation Starfleet as Hydra is to SHIELD in Captain America: The Winter Soldier: an illegal conspiracy that answers only to itself and does whatever it wants.

WHo si to say they are not officially sanctioned by the Federation but with highly secretive orders?

They themselves, in "Inquisition." Plus every single episode or film they have been in since. That's the whole point of Section 31, that they are not a legitimate government agency.

Well we've seen very little of their policies, but Sloane's example would seem to suggest they'd act fairly selflessly.

Abduction, torture, unconstitutional interference in a foreign government's internal affairs, arranging to get an innocent person murdered, more abduction and torture, and attempted genocide? Those are what we see Sloan do in "Inquisition," "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges," and "Extreme Measures." Ain't nothin' selfless there.

Being ruthless in pursuit of one's goals does not require those goals to be self serving.

In fact, where have we seen any evidence of them being power hungry as such?

In 2259 of the Kelvin Timeline, Section 31 managed to place an agent as the head of Starfleet Command, developed their own private starship powerful enough to defeat a Constitution-class starship only a year old, and attempted to incite a war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire so that Admiral Marcus could lead the war effort and hold power over the UFP. Their actions led to the deaths of God knows how many Federation Starfleet officers in the London bombing, the attack on Starfleet Headquarters, and the near-destruction of the USS Enterprise, and to God only knows how many hundreds of thousands of deaths when their private starship crashed into and destroyed most of downtown San Francisco.

All so that their man Marcus could start a war he would lead to victory.

Power-hungry enough for you?

And that's not, for instance, counting the time they decided to assist the Klingon Empire in abducting a Denobulan citizen from Earth in the 2150s so as to help them coerce him into providing medical treatment to unwilling Klingon patients, all in the name of "stability," rather than simply allowing the United Earth government to provide that medical assistance through normal diplomatic channels.

Or the time they decided to interfere in the internal affairs of the Romulan Star Empire by putting someone they believed to be an agent of theirs onto the Romulan Continuing Committee (getting an innocent Romulan Senator framed for treason and executed in the process, and getting a Federation citizen abducted and tortured along the line) -- only to have the whole thing turn out to be pretty damn pointless after Shinzon of Remus vaporized the entire Romulan Senate. All in violation of the Federation Charter.

Or the time they decided to attempt to commit genocide against the Founders of the Dominion.

Oh yeah, there's no power hunger there. Not at all.

S31 represent the James Bonds or Jack Bauers of the federation, people who do especially unsavoury things to ward off greater evils.

Commander James Bond, Royal Navy, is an agent of the Secret Intelligence Service, popularly known as MI-6. As such, he answers to his superiors within MI-6 and ultimately to the Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service, who in turn answers to Her Majesty's Government in the persons of Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Her Majesty's Government, in turn, relies upon the confidence of a majority of members of the democratically-elected House of Commons, who in turn hold office only with a democratic mandate from the British people.

Jack Bauer, meanwhile, is an agent of the Counter Terrorist Unit, a fictional division of (according to the 24 Wiki) the United States Department of Homeland Security. As such, he answers to his superiors within CTU, the Directors of the Counter Terrorist Unit Domestic Units, who in turn answered to the directors of the Division Command and District Commands, who in turn ultimately answer to the United States Secretary of Homeland Security. The Secretary of Homeland Security, in turn, is appointed by the President of the United States subject to confirmation or rejection by the United States Senate. The President and United States Senators, of course, are democratically elected and hold office after receiving a popular mandate from the people of the United States.

With both James Bond and Jack Bauer, there is a clear line of democratic accountability -- executive authority delegated to them by organizations created through statute by democratically-elected legislatures, subject to accountability from elected officials.

This is in marked contrast to Section 31, which is not a legitimate part of the Federation Starfleet, whose leaders do not answer to any admirals from Starfleet Command, and which does not answer to the Federation Council or Federation President, and whose existence is not authorized by statute nor subject to democratic accountability.

Section 31 is protecting the Federation. they don't do anything to endanger the average Joe,

I rather think the citizens of San Francisco in the Kelvin Timeline would disagree with that assertion.

Again, without a system of democratic accountability, all we have to go on is their own word. How can we trust them without accountability?

And it's also important to point out that while Section 31's existence may be part of the Earth Starfleet charter, it's not part of the Federation Starfleet charter. Despite the similarity in names, the two Starfleets are NOT the same organization.

So the minute the Federation Starfleet came into existence, it not only negated the existence of the Earth Starfleet, but also that of Section 31.

FWIW.

An excellent point. I mean, we don't even know that part of the United Earth Starfleet Charter said! We know from "Divergence" that the Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter contains "a few lines that make allowances for bending the rules during times of extraordinary threat" (in Harris's words). That is a far, far cry from a statute establishing a permanent organization with permanent carte blanche to disregard all laws and all systems of democratic accountability and undertake whatsoever operations they may so choose.

Saying that the Section 31 organization is authorized by Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter is a little bit like saying a permanent special operations unit inside the United States Navy with carte blanche to ignore all laws and answer to nobody is established by a provision allowing for some rules to be bent in a crisis in the February 1776 Act of the General Court of Massachusetts which established the Massachusetts Colonial Navy. It's pure legal nonsense!

Once again:

Section 31 is not to the Federation as the Central Intelligence Agency is to the United States. Section 31 is to the Federation Starfleet as Hydra is to SHIELD.

 

[Vandervecken]

Semantics. Section 31 sees themselves as being part of the Federation's founding charter. Legality based on technicalities is not true legality if it wouldn't hold up in an open trial.

"Protect against threats" is the kind of vague justification that excuses fascism. If you need to manipulate other nations' politics through espionage and subversion to protect your country, it doesn't deserve to be protected. Make no mistake, section 31 is a fascist organization has rationalized itself into a corner where it can do no wrong, and is justified in assassination and even genocide so long as it can claim it was 'Protecting the Federation'.

A nation that deserves to be 'protected against threats' does so through building a strong military but only exercising it defensively within its borders, and by building good faith relationships with other governments through diplomacy.

Fascist means a dictatorial government that controls all industry. Never saw much interest in economics in anything Sec 31 did, I never heard anything about them taking authoritarian political control of the Federation, and somehow the Federation Council not only keeps on keeping on in a universe that contains Sec 31, but manages to have the final say over whether or not the Founders get the cure. Not Sec 31, the Federation Council.

Structures of governments aren't adjudicated--that's a political, not a judicial determination. The legality of Sec 31 is determined by the political branches (assuming some similarity between the Federation and the US), not a court. That it operates with the knowledge of the Federation Council does indeed make it legal, whatever exists or doesn't exist in the Fed charter. Sec 31 IS chartered in the Federation of the 24th Century, at least, by the government that countenances it.

Finally, polities don't have to justify or otherwise "deserve" to be protected from dangers. If they can protect themselves, they should, and if they can't, then they can't. But the right to avail oneself of defensive capabilities that one possesses isn't a privilege that must be earned by adherence to ANY ethical standard. Ie, NO ONE is under some moral onus to lie down and die before a mortal threat if the defenses at his or her disposal don't pass some entirely arbitrary ethical smell test imposed by--whom? An elitist, self-congratulatory intelligentsia, perhaps?

 

[Sci]

Fascist means a dictatorial government that controls all industry.

No, that would be Soviet Communism. Fascism as a political philosophy (rather than a system of governance) is characterized primarily by its use of tribalistic in-group/out-group thinking, its demonization of members of the out-group, its veneration of violence as a form of national renewal, its disregard for liberal democracy, scorn for the concept of human rights, and its quest for national autarky.

Section 31 can be fairly described, at the least, as somewhat fascistic in its ideology. It is certainly authoritarian and anti-democratic (since it places itself outside of any systems of democratic accountability), it is scornful of what we would in the context of Star Trek call "sentient rights," and it certainly shows a callous disregard for the lives of non-Federates.

Never saw much interest in economics in anything Sec 31 did, I never heard anything about them taking authoritarian political control of the Federation, and somehow the Federation Council not only keeps on keeping on in a universe that contains Sec 31, but manages to have the final say over whether or not the Founders get the cure. Not Sec 31, the Federation Council.

Only after Bashir and O'Brien thwarted Section 31's attempts to keep the existence of the cure a secret from the Council and from the galaxy at large.

Structures of governments aren't adjudicated--that's a political, not a judicial determination. The legality of Sec 31 is determined by the political branches (assuming some similarity between the Federation and the US), not a court.

The legality of Section 31 has never been established by the political branches. Its members cite Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter, but this is a charter for a space service that was absorbed into the Federation Starfleet and ceased to exist (meaning the UESF Charter is defunct) and its actual language -- establishing that some rules can be bent in a crisis -- in no way authorize the establishment of a permanent organization with carte blanche to act however it wants without democratic accountability. Certainly at no point has anyone cited an Act of the Federation Council authorizing the existence of Section 31.

That it operates with the knowledge of the Federation Council does indeed make it legal.

The Mafia operates with the knowledge of the United States Congress -- that doesn't make it legal.

And we do not actually know that the Federation Council is aware of Section 31's existence. Bashir's and Sisko's attempts to alert others to its existence, according to "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges," were buried.

 

[The Wormhole]

In 2259 of the Kelvin Timeline, Section 31 managed to place an agent as the head of Starfleet Command, developed their own private starship powerful enough to defeat a Constitution-class starship only a year old, and attempted to incite a war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire so that Admiral Marcus could lead the war effort and hold power over the UFP. Their actions led to the deaths of God knows how many Federation Starfleet officers in the London bombing, the attack on Starfleet Headquarters, and the near-destruction of the USS Enterprise, and to God only knows how many hundreds of thousands of deaths when their private starship crashed into and destroyed most of downtown San Francisco.

All so that their man Marcus could start a war he would lead to victory.

IDW's comics actually put a different spin on that, in which it was Marcus who was overly ambitious and ended up endangering not only the Federation and Starfleet but also Section 31 itself with his plans. Then again, the comics also present Section 31 with their own fleet of starships, basically the same class as the Kelvin only made from the same black stealth armour Vengeance was made from, so maybe their interpretation shouldn't be brought up.

 

[Vandervecken]

No, that would be Soviet Communism. Fascism as a political philosophy (rather than a system of governance) is characterized primarily by its use of tribalistic in-group/out-group thinking, its demonization of members of the out-group, its veneration of violence as a form of national renewal, its disregard for liberal democracy, scorn for the concept of human rights, and its quest for national autarky.

Section 31 can be fairly described, at the least, as somewhat fascistic in its ideology. It is certainly authoritarian and anti-democratic (since it places itself outside of any systems of democratic accountability), it is scornful of what we would in the context of Star Trek call "sentient rights," and it certainly shows a callous disregard for the lives of non-Federates.



Only after Bashir and O'Brien thwarted Section 31's attempts to keep the existence of the cure a secret from the Council and from the galaxy at large.



The legality of Section 31 has never been established by the political branches. Its members cite Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter, but this is a charter for a space service that was absorbed into the Federation Starfleet and ceased to exist (meaning the UESF Charter is defunct) and its actual language -- establishing that some rules can be bent in a crisis -- in no way authorize the establishment of a permanent organization with carte blanche to act however it wants without democratic accountability. Certainly at no point has anyone cited an Act of the Federation Council authorizing the existence of Section 31.



The Mafia operates with the knowledge of the United States Congress -- that doesn't make it legal.

And we do not actually know that the Federation Council is aware of Section 31's existence. Bashir's and Sisko's attempts to alert others to its existence, according to "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges," were buried.

No, fascism is as I have stated it. Communism would include wealth equalization. In practice, both lead to authoritarian totalitarianism, but the way I described fascism is accurate. Unless you really want to start posting not-very-useful dictionary definitions?

The point here is that Sec 31 is not in the business of political control. Your (incorrect) quibbling with my short-form definition of fascism (a word invoked by the poster to whom I was replying) doesn't alter that.

The US Congress doesn't control the mafia. In the end, the Federation Council DOES control Sec 31. And the fact that it countenances Sec 31's existence DOES establish Sec 31's legality. That is all that's required. Black Ops organizations ARE, in practice, legal. Their tactics and people may never enter any court for judgment of any kind, because that is what their nature requires, but I think we can be sure that they all face judgment if apropos, and probably very harsh judgment.

 

[Sci]

IDW's comics actually put a different spin on that, in which it was Marcus who was overly ambitious and ended up endangering not only the Federation and Starfleet but also Section 31 itself with his plans. Then again, the comics also present Section 31 with their own fleet of starships, basically the same class as the Kelvin only made from the same black stealth armour Vengeance was made from, so maybe their interpretation shouldn't be brought up.

*shrugs* I was keeping things restricted to the canon. If we bring in the apocryphal, well, then, there's a long list of civilian Federation deaths we can lay at Section 31's feet from the novels.

The US Congress doesn't control the mafia. In the end, the Federation Council DOES control Sec 31.

No, it does not. Sloan makes that very clear in "Inquisition:"

BASHIR
So, are you going to tell me who you are? Who you work for?

SLOAN
I would think it's obvious -- the same people you work for. The Federation. Starfleet.

BASHIR You don't expect me to believe you're with Internal Affairs, do you?

SLOAN
Of course not. Internal Affairs is a competent department, but... limited.

BASHIR
Then what department are you with?

SLOAN
Let's just say I belong to another branch of Starfleet Intelligence... our official designation is Section Thirty-one.

BASHIR
Never heard of it.

DEEP SPACE NINE: "Inquisition" - REV. 1/29/98 - ACT FIVE 51A. 41A CONTINUED: (3)

SLOAN
We keep a low profile. It works out better that way... for all concerned.

BASHIR
And what does "Section Thirty-one" do -- aside from kidnapping Starfleet officers?

SLOAN
We search out and identify potential dangers to the Federation.

BASHIR
And once identified?

SLOAN
We deal with them.

BASHIR How?

SLOAN
Quietly.

BASHIR
So if I had turned out to be a Dominion agent -- what would've happened to me?

SLOAN
We wouldn't be standing here having this conversation.

BASHIR
And Starfleet sanctions what you're doing?

SLOAN We don't submit reports or ask for approval for specific operations, if that's what you mean. We're an autonomous department.

BASHIR
Authorized by whom?

DEEP SPACE NINE: "Inquisition" - REV. 1/29/98 - ACT FIVE 51B. 41A CONTINUED: (4)

Sloan smiles, maintaining control of the situation.

SLOAN
Section Thirty-one was part of the original Starfleet charter.

BASHIR
That was two hundred years ago. Are you telling me you've been operating on your own ever since? Without specific orders? Accountable to nobody, but yourselves?

SLOAN
You make it sound so... ominous.

BASHIR
Isn't it? If what you say is true, you function as judge, jury and executioner. I'd say that's too much power for anyone.

It's very clear: The Federation Council does not control Section 31. No one does.

And the fact that it countenances Sec 31's existence

This has not been established.

Black Ops organizations ARE, in practice, legal.

When authorized by statute, certainly. No one questions the legality of, say, SEAL Team Six of the United States Navy. But there again, the United States Navy is authorized by statute, receives funding from Congress, is run by a Secretary of the Navy and a Secretary of Defense who are appointed by the democratically-elected President of the United States and confirmed by the democratically-elected United States Senate, and its leaders are subject to Congressional oversight.

By contrast, "Section 31" cites as justification for its existence a completely unrelated section of the charter for a defunct space service and has by its own account been operating outside of anyone's control for two hundred years. Its leaders are not appointed by the Federation President, its missions are not authorized by Starfleet, its agents are not subject to Federation Council oversight -- indeed, according to "Extreme Measures," it was literally spying on the President himself, rather than being answerable to him.

You are making a very powerful and compelling argument for the legality of Starfleet Intelligence. Not for Section 31.

 

[The Wormhole]

If we bring in the apocryphal, well, then, there's a long list of civilian Federation deaths we can lay at Section 31's feet from the novels.

Including a Federation President and his staff!

 

[Vandervecken]

*shrugs* I was keeping things restricted to the canon. If we bring in the apocryphal, well, then, there's a long list of civilian Federation deaths we can lay at Section 31's feet from the novels.



No, it does not. Sloan makes that very clear in "Inquisition:"



It's very clear: The Federation Council does not control Section 31. No one does.



This has not been established.



When authorized by statute, certainly. No one questions the legality of, say, SEAL Team Six of the United States Navy. But there again, the United States Navy is authorized by statute, receives funding from Congress, is run by a Secretary of the Navy and a Secretary of Defense who are appointed by the democratically-elected President of the United States and confirmed by the democratically-elected United States Senate, and its leaders are subject to Congressional oversight.

By contrast, "Section 31" cites as justification for its existence a completely unrelated section of the charter for a defunct space service and has by its own account been operating outside of anyone's control for two hundred years. Its leaders are not appointed by the Federation President, its missions are not authorized by Starfleet, its agents are not subject to Federation Council oversight -- indeed, according to "Extreme Measures," it was literally spying on the President himself, rather than being answerable to him.

You are making a very powerful and compelling argument for the legality of Starfleet Intelligence. Not for Section 31.

Sloan didn't actually agree with Bashir. All he said was "you make it sound so ominous." That's not the same as "yes, that's what we do." That they don't fill out reports doesn't mean their agents don't have to walk into rooms and make verbal reports to someone with a paygrade higher than theirs who will evaluate and decide. If it's a sub rosa Fed Council group, then they are legal. And, I will add, Sec 31 of the charter has to mean SOMETHING. There's no reason why it can't mean this, the Sec 31 we know.

I won't defend spying on the President. The CIA is authorized by statute and funded by Congress. I can't prove it, but I'd bet every penny I have that, some time in the last 20 or so years, some section of the CIA has spied on high government officials without authorization from anyone outside it. That some part of an operation may be rogue doesn't indict all of it or mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.

And in the perfect universe, the moral one, Julian Bashir, Miles O'Brien, and Benjamin Sisko, those noted Federation Council representatives, make the decision to undermine an entire defensive operation of the Federation in time of war.

 

[The Wormhole]

Sloan didn't actually agree with Bashir. All he said was "you make it sound so ominous." That's not the same as "yes, that's what we do." That they don't fill out reports doesn't mean their agents don't have to walk into rooms and make verbal reports to someone with a paygrade higher than theirs who will evaluate and decide. If it's a sub rosa Fed Council group, then they are legal.

The novels go with the rogue and illegal angle in how they depict Section 31. And they've even had one of the co-writers of Inquisition co-write one of the Section 31 novels (David Weddle co-wrote the novel Abyss) lending credence to that being the intent.

And, I will add, Sec 31 of the charter has to mean SOMETHING. There's no reason why it can't mean this, the Sec 31 we know.

All it means in regards to the agency is that they are using their interpretation of the thirty-first section of the Starfleet charter as justification and rationalization of their conduct.

 

[Sci]

Sloan didn't actually agree with Bashir. All he said was "you make it sound so ominous." That's not the same as "yes, that's what we do."

In the context of the scene, yes it is. Sloan's goal is to persuade Bashir to join them; Bashir objects to the idea of Section 31 not answering to the Federation government. If Section 31 did answer to the Federation government, then it would be consistent with Sloan's goal to tell Bashir such. That he did not means that he agreed with Bashir's assessment -- they operate on their own, without specific orders, accountable to nobody but themselves.

That they don't fill out reports doesn't mean their agents don't have to walk into rooms and make verbal reports to someone with a paygrade higher than theirs who will evaluate and decide.

You are literally making things up that have no basis in the text.

And, I will add, Sec 31 of the charter has to mean SOMETHING.

Article 14, Section 31 of the defunct United Earth Starfleet Charter refers to bending rules in times of crisis. That is not the same thing as establishing a permanent organization with eternal carte blanche.

I won't defend spying on the President. The CIA is authorized by statute and funded by Congress. I can't prove it, but I'd bet every penny I have that, some time in the last 20 or so years, some section of the CIA has spied on high government officials without authorization from anyone outside it. That some part of an operation may be rogue doesn't indict all of it or mean that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.

You are making a compelling argument for not abolishing legitimate intelligence agencies if they occasionally abuse their power. That is a far cry from making an argument for a rogue agency that does whatever it wants, which is what Section 31 is. Your argument applies well to Starfleet Intelligence; it applies not at all to Section 31.

I repeat:

Section 31 is to Starfleet as Hydra is to SHIELD.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

No one here is arguing that legitimate governments don't do shady things, because everyone knows they do. And we're certainly not saying that organizations like the CIA are perfect, or that they always do the right thing. Sometimes the CIA has done terribly wrong things. Even I admit that.

But the clincher is, everyone knows that the CIA exists. It is not a secret organization. Its mission is outlined in the law, it (mostly) operates within the law, it has to justify its own existence and budget, and it generally confines its activities to those groups or individuals which present a genuine, credible threat to the United States.

(Side note: I think a lot of us have an overly "romanticized" view of organizations like the CIA. We like to think it is some kind of ultra-badass "cloak and dagger" organization, with suave and debonair secret agents operating in foreign lands while wearing tuxedos and getting the girl, but that's basically a construct of movies and TV shows. Reality is probably a lot more boring.)

Section 31, on the other hand, acts to eliminate those whom it believes are a threat. Not those who genuniely ARE a threat - just those that Section 31 thinks is a threat. There's not a single citizen of the Federation who, if the winds happen to blow a certain way, might not fall within Section 31's crosshairs. Literally anyone, anywhere, at any time, could be targeted by them, and no one would ever know.

And Section 31 doesn't have to justify this to anyone. Whatever it says, goes. If it says you're a threat - you are dead. No appeals, no rights, nothing. You are simply gone. And if it makes a mistake (don't even try to tell me it hasn't)? No biggie. It just sweeps everything under the rug and moves on.

 

[The Wormhole]

Section 31 is to Starfleet as Hydra is to SHIELD.

When you look at it like that it make you realize STID and Winter Soldier are largely the same movie, just with different outcomes. In STID, Starfleet comes out on top, in Winter Soldier, Hydra does.

 

[Sci]

When you look at it like that it make you realize STID and Winter Soldier are largely the same movie, just with different outcomes. In STID, Starfleet comes out on top, in Winter Soldier, Hydra does.

Well, Star Trek Into Darkness and Captain America: The Winter Soldier certainly have similar themes, yeah. They're both damning indictments of the Obama administration's drone assassination program and of creeping militarism within liberal democracy. The distinction, of course, being that Star Trek Into Darkness adapts it to the military space opera genre, whereas Captain America: The Winter Soldier adapts it to the superheroic genre.

But I don't think Hydra comes out on top in Captain America: The Winter Soldier. They've been exposed, their plan to commit the largest act of genocide in human history is thwarted, their leader has been killed. The primary distinction is that Star Trek Into Darkness essentially still thinks of Starfleet as being a legitimate organization, whereas Captain America: The Winter Soldier depicts SHIELD as being too hopelessly corrupted to be allowed to continue to exist -- so Starfleet endures in the former, but SHIELD is dissolved in the latter.

 

[Spot261]

No, they claim that they protect the Federation against threats from behind the scenes. But they operate without any form of democratic accountability; they do not report to the Federation President (in fact, according to "Extreme Measures," they actively spied on the President by placing an agent in President Jaresh-Inyo's Cabinet); they do not report to the Federation Council; they don't take orders from any elected officials; they target whomsoever they want; they operate without any system of democratic accountability.

How do we know they don't answer to anyone? Nothing of the sort has been stated on screen, all we know is our heroes our unaware of them. Thats's still consistent with their being classified at a higher level.

It's not uncommon for intelligence agencies to monitor government officials to some extent, thats almost a given in any society.

But the clincher is, everyone knows that the CIA exists. It is not a secret organization. Its mission is outlined in the law, it (mostly) operates within the law, it has to justify its own existence and budget, and it generally confines its activities to those groups or individuals which present a genuine, credible threat to the United States.

Yet you seriously believe every aspect of the intelligence apparatus is publicly acknowledged? "Covert" is a concept that can apply at levels above tactical.

As for operating within the law, how do we know S31 don't also (mostly) do so? Or that real world intelligence organisations do? What little we have seen acknowledged or exposed in recent years has been fairly flexible in that regard. As for their legitimacy, the clue is in the name, there's an artcile within the charter that specifically deals with the legality of their actions.

We've seen so little of S31 and that was under desperate circumstances, more mundane operations likely wouldn't involve such extreme acts. Yes we know they're there to deal with threats to the federation, but such threats are rarely so extreme or so determined as the Dominion. It's like questioning the legality of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. Countries do in fact commit dreadful acts in times of desperation without needing to resort to intelligence work. The point of that intelligence work is that it may actually reduce the damage overall, legality being a secondary concern where an existential threat is concerned.

(Side note: I think a lot of us have an overly "romanticized" view of organizations like the CIA. We like to think it is some kind of ultra-badass "cloak and dagger" organization, with suave and debonair secret agents operating in foreign lands while wearing tuxedos and getting the girl, but that's basically a construct of movies and TV shows. Reality is probably a lot more boring.)

I'd be surprised if anyone really needed that explaining.

 

[Ithekro]

The scale of the conspiracy just to cover up Odo's medical records as taken by Starfleet Medical would suggest government backing of Section 31 rather than it being entirely freelance. Add to this Admiral Ross earlier on being in on the acts of Section 31 would suggest that there is more too it than just what Sloan is telling (or not telling) Bashir, who is not only a doctor, but also only a Lieutenant.

Simply we do not know enough about the organization that is factual truth due to our perspective being mostly from the eyes of a Starfleet Doctor who definitely wouldn't have the clearances for that sort of information. The closest thing we have to what department Section 31 is with is also from Sloan, "Let's just say I belong to another branch of Starfleet Intelligence...". Aside from that he doesn't actually answer Bashir's questions, but instead answering with non-answers. They don't file reports for specific operations...but that doesn't mean they don't file reports about general activities, assets used, supply requests and the like. While it probably isn't impossible in a fictional world (and possibly reality) it is unlikely an organization like Section 31 could realistically function with the assets it can access and areas it can function with the amount of high level clearances needed, without being an officially sanctioned organization by the Federation. Meaning they likely have oversight someplace, just we are not told about it to make them seem more evil in a way the writers are not usually allowed to write for the Federation to be.

What we know is the Earth Starfleet charter. What we are not told is if Section 31 was placed into the Federation Starfleet charter specifically creating this organization so the old Earth unit could maintain its name. The other races signing off on it as it would integrate parts of their own special operation intel unit into the Human group to counter things like the Romulans and Klingons, which from Section 31's earlier operations against the Klingons suggests they might be at least competent in finding a way to neutralize a problem for at least the short term. Assuming that the genetic alteration of the Klingon species lessened their aggressive tendencies for a few decades and was keeping them away from the Earth and their allies during their conflict with the Romulans and the aftermath of that war before the signing of the Federation Starfleet Charter. Probably for many decades to come. Hostilities only really coming back during the early 23rd century.

 

[KelisThePoet]

Finally, polities don't have to justify or otherwise "deserve" to be protected from dangers. If they can protect themselves, they should, and if they can't, then they can't. But the right to avail oneself of defensive capabilities that one possesses isn't a privilege that must be earned by adherence to ANY ethical standard. Ie, NO ONE is under some moral onus to lie down and die before a mortal threat if the defenses at his or her disposal don't pass some entirely arbitrary ethical smell test imposed by--whom? An elitist, self-congratulatory intelligentsia, perhaps?

So the polity or state or nation's existence is justified absent any of its attributes. The polity or state or nation can protect itself from anything it deems a threat by any means necessary. And the polity or state or nation has a sneering disregard for both traditional ethics and for academia (pejoratively referred to as an "intelligentsia). If that doesn't describe extreme, aggressive nationalism, I don't know what does. And if extreme, aggressive nationalism has nothing to do with the idea of fascism, I don't know what does. Rhetorically disqualify the label "fascist" on technical grounds, if you like. Section 31 operates like an authoritarian, nationalist state; and many of those throughout history have called themselves "fascist," while others have expressed admiration for those who have called themselves "fascist."

And setting up a choice between avoiding a mortal threat and following arbitrary ethics is a straw man argument, because obviously no one picks the arbitrary ethics. It's just that some of us think little things like government organizations killing innocent people over perceived threats to the whole as defined by the government are, in fact, the mortal threats (quite literally).

 

[Sci]

How do we know they don't answer to anyone? Nothing of the sort has been stated on screen,

It has been explicitly stated on-screen, and, as I said above, if it were false, it would be inconsistent with Sloan's goals not to say so. Sloan's goal in the final scene of "Inquisition" is to recruit Bashir into Section 31; if Bashir objects to Section 31 on the basis of unaccountability, it would be easy, consistent with Sloan's goals, and utterly harmless, for him to just say, "We answer to the President, same as you." But he does not.

It's not uncommon for intelligence agencies to monitor government officials to some extent, thats almost a given in any society.

Spying on the President?

But the clincher is, everyone knows that the CIA exists. It is not a secret organization. Its mission is outlined in the law, it (mostly) operates within the law, it has to justify its own existence and budget, and it generally confines its activities to those groups or individuals which present a genuine, credible threat to the United States.

Yet you seriously believe every aspect of the intelligence apparatus is publicly acknowledged?

That is absolutely not what Mr. Laser Beam said. What he did say was that the CIA is publicly known to exist, and that it answers to the democratically-elected President and Congress.

Now, there may be a reasonable argument to be made about the legitimacy of an agency whose existence is not public knowledge but which still answers to the President and Congress. To draw a comparison, for many years, the existence of the Secret Intelligence Service was not acknowledged by the British government -- in fact, its existence was not officially acknowledged until 1994. But MI-6 still answered to Her Majesty's Government while its existence was an official secret.

As for operating within the law, how do we know S31 don't also (mostly) do so?

Because literally every single canonical appearance but one ("Demons/Terra Prime") has featured Section 31 violating deeply important laws -- abduction and torture ("Inquisition;" "Divergence/Affliction"), interfering in foreign internal affairs, conspiracy to commit abduction and torture, conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice, conspiracy to murder ("Inter Arma"), attempted genocide and murder ("Extreme Measures"), murder of Federation Starfleet officers and civilians, blackmail, illegal employment of genetically augmented agents, and conspiracy to commit a false-flag attack that would incite an interstellar war (Star Trek Into Darkness).

As for their legitimacy, the clue is in the name, there's an artcile within the charter that specifically deals with the legality of their actions.

As I have already explained, this is utter legal nonsense. An article in the charter of a defunct space service of a state that allowed itself to be subsumed into a larger polity two hundred years ago which allows for bending rules in times of crisis, is absolutely not the same thing as a statute authorizing a permanent organization with carte blanche to put itself above the law and the government.

We've seen so little of S31 and that was under desperate circumstances, more mundane operations likely wouldn't involve such extreme acts.

If they managed to stay secret for 200 years, they probably don't engage in mundane operations. That's what Starfleet Intelligence is for. Section 31 would need to be usually inactive most of the time to avoid public exposure. There is a reason that even though MI-6's existence was not officially acknowledged until 1994, its existence was so commonly known that James Bond novels were written about them for forty years before then.

It's like questioning the legality of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.

You mean, it's perfectly reasonable?

The scale of the conspiracy just to cover up Odo's medical records as taken by Starfleet Medical would suggest government backing of Section 31 rather than it being entirely freelance.

No, it suggests an illegal conspiracy within the government.

They don't file reports for specific operations...but that doesn't mean they don't file reports about general activities, assets used, supply requests and the like.

Once again: Sloan's goal is to recruit Bashir. If Bashir objects to Section 31 on the basis of unaccountability and Bashir is wrong, it would be consistent with his goals to correct Bashir and it would cost him nothing to just say, "We answer to the President, just like you." If he does not, then Bashir must be speaking accurately.

While it probably isn't impossible in a fictional world (and possibly reality) it is unlikely an organization like Section 31 could realistically function with the assets it can access

This is Star Trek, a world whose economy exists in a state of virtual abundance. This part is relatively plausible.

What we know is the Earth Starfleet charter. What we are not told is if Section 31 was placed into the Federation Starfleet charter specifically creating this organization so the old Earth unit could maintain its name.

There is no evidence it has.

The other races signing off on it as it would integrate parts of their own special operation intel unit into the Human group to counter things like the Romulans and Klingons,

Sure. It's called Starfleet Intelligence.