oh, yah. sorry.
Star Trek novels in 2010, starting with "Inception" this January
- Thread starter GhostFaceSaint
- Start date
Hmm...unless Jarah-Inyo was behaving rather suspiciously--and was possibly engaging in secret deals that, while profitable for him, would ultimately undermine the security and stability of the Federation unless someone put a stop to it....
(Shades of Watergate.)
Never assume, Mr. Sci. Things aren't always what they seem...in the cloak-and-dagger underworld of espianoge....
Well a incident from the war was portrayed in the Shelby story in Tales of the Captain Table.
Hmm...unless Jarah-Inyo was behaving rather suspiciously--and was possibly engaging in secret deals that, while profitable for him, would ultimately undermine the security and stability of the Federation unless someone put a stop to it....
(Shades of Watergate.)
Never assume, Mr. Sci. Things aren't always what they seem...in the cloak-and-dagger underworld of espianoge....
Jarah-Inyo? The same Jarah-Inyo who was more worried about the ramifications of declaring martial law then his own political status? Nah, you must have him confused with Koll Azernal aka Chief of Staff Darth Vader.
Hmm...unless Jarah-Inyo was behaving rather suspiciously--and was possibly engaging in secret deals that, while profitable for him, would ultimately undermine the security and stability of the Federation unless someone put a stop to it....
(Shades of Watergate.)
Never assume, Mr. Sci. Things aren't always what they seem...in the cloak-and-dagger underworld of espianoge....
As I said in another thread, if that is the case, then Federation Security (the UFP equivalent to the FBI established in Star Trek III) should have handled things under a warrant from a Federation judge in a classified court (equivalent to the US FISA courts). Section 31 has no right to exist and has no right to operate, and certainly has no right to spy upon the President on its own initiative.
Hmm. So as not to bring this board off topic, let's discuss this in that other thread.
Hmm...unless Jarah-Inyo was behaving rather suspiciously--and was possibly engaging in secret deals that, while profitable for him, would ultimately undermine the security and stability of the Federation unless someone put a stop to it....
(Shades of Watergate.)
Never assume, Mr. Sci. Things aren't always what they seem...in the cloak-and-dagger underworld of espianoge....
As I said in another thread, if that is the case, then Federation Security (the UFP equivalent to the FBI established in Star Trek III) should have handled things under a warrant from a Federation judge in a classified court (equivalent to the US FISA courts). Section 31 has no right to exist and has no right to operate, and certainly has no right to spy upon the President on its own initiative.
Plus Section 31 would likely kill Jarah-Inyo if they saw him as a threat and SI or whatever other LEGAL law enforcement group that would get involved would give him a trial, which everyone has a right to.
Remember that the authorization of Section 31 exists in both the United Earth and (apparently) the Federation Charters. Although I don't know if this has been clarified much yet.
And yet everyone not in Section 31 knows this and still sees them as crooks, and Harris described Section 31 of the UE Starfleet charter to "allowed certain rules of conduct to be "bent" during times of extraordinary threat". That sounds more like a temporary measure instead of authorization to form a covert operation.
It's interesting that we have yet to see a full copy of the charter. Who knows? Maybe the original Federation Starfleet Charter has a more specific Article 14, Section 31 (Fine Print after Section 30, likely as not...
). Until we see the charter, we'll never know, so can we please GET...BACK...ON...TOPIC!!!
). Until we see the charter, we'll never know, so can we please GET...BACK...ON...TOPIC!!!
Canonically, the only authorization for Section 31's existence that we know of comes from Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet (UESF) Charter. Sloan never cites the Federation Starfleet Charter in "Inquisition," only "the original Starfleet Charter" (emphasis mine).
ENT's "Affliction/Divergence" refers to Article 14, Section 31 of the UESF Charter as allowing certain rules of conduct to be "bent" during times of extraordinary crisis. This is a reference to allowing for leniency in certain circumstances; it does not establish a permanent organization granted permanent immunity from all laws and in possession of eternal carte blanche to behave however it likes in all situations, with no accountability to the Federation government.
There is no reference to the Federation Charter or United Earth Charter establishing Section 31.
Sci's right. It's a complete misreading of the text to assume that the founders of Starfleet intended to create an unaccountable black-ops organization. Rather, the organization exploits a vaguely worded section of the charter to justify its existence.
^So...until the less-than-likely event that we get a cannonical view of the UFP Starfleet Charter that shows a Section 31 authorization...we'll have to assume that The Bureau is a group of, for lack of a better term, vigilantes...with too much power....
(This is what happens...when you fill the courts with hogwash about A Living, Breathing Document....
)
(This is what happens...when you fill the courts with hogwash about A Living, Breathing Document....
There is a very large difference between interpreting a legal document to accommodate changing circumstances -- such as interpreting the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against warrantless or probable cause-less searches as also applying to remote surveillance, or interpreting references to the President of the United States as being a "he" as also referring to women, or recognizing that there are implicit rights established but not enumerated such as the right to privacy -- and literally just making stuff up.
^Ah-hem....
If one were to interperet the Starfleet Charter as A Living, Breathing Document, than one might, in theory, use Artical 14, Section 31's line about bending rules to justify something like The Bureau--which, so it claims, is all about "bending rules" in times of what it believes to be "extraordinary crises"....
But, uh, Sci...?
(Points to thread topic)
If one were to interperet the Starfleet Charter as A Living, Breathing Document, than one might, in theory, use Artical 14, Section 31's line about bending rules to justify something like The Bureau--which, so it claims, is all about "bending rules" in times of what it believes to be "extraordinary crises"....
But, uh, Sci...?
(Points to thread topic)
Nonsense. There's a big difference between saying, "Hey, be forgiving to the guy who bent a few rules during a crisis" and saying, "Give this organization absolute power to do whatever it wants, to whomever it wants, whenever it wants, with no accountability to anyone whatsoever."
Don't lecture me about staying on-topic when you're the one who brought up the question of strict constructionism vs. judicial activism.
Sorry to mire this thread further into the world of Section31,but IIRC,at the end of "Abyss" it seemed as though S31 had not only ships but very many troops at it's disposal....so,I'm dubious as to just how much support they receive from Starfleet (unofficially of course).
^I feel confident we'll get the answer...sooner or later.
I strongly suspect that we'll hear more from The Bureau as the Typhon Pact storyline unfolds....
I strongly suspect that we'll hear more from The Bureau as the Typhon Pact storyline unfolds....
.
^Hopefully we will. What kind of "cold war" would it be if there were no clandestine spy organizations causing shit behind the scenes?
True. My guess would be either the Breen story or the Romulan/DS9 one (Vaughn/Kirk Cabal?).Similar threads
