I am trying to comprehend the idea of where people think legality and espionage are friends.
Spoilers Who is sympathetic to the Klingons?
- Thread starter Charles Phipps
- Start date
Espionage, in and of itself, is not illegal.
Last edited:
But he may have never risen to power if we weren't helping prop up a corrupt regime. We made a lot of poor decisions, that in the end made the world a less stable place.
Perhaps not, but I attribute this mainly to 20/20 hindsight.
Fulgencio Batista may have been a ruthless dictator, and I don't doubt that it was wrong to support him, but that doesn't mean Castro was any better. In fact I think we all know he was just as bad as Batista ever was.
I don't like what Castro became after he rose to power and he was clearly an asshole by the time of the Missile Crisis, but the idea that Batista was really any better is just fallacious. We traded a corrupt military dictator for a revolution that could have become a pro-American and more democratic government 90 miles from our shores but we were so paranoid and angry about the seizure of American business interests and property on the island that the CIA and corporate interests couldn't abide anyone who told Americans what to do. Castro was driven into the arms of the Soviets by our attitudes and behavior. We helped create him. Yes, he committed his own crimes himself and chose to become a puppet state of Moscow, but that might never have happened had we not blown a gasket and gone ballistic over his regime nationalizing American property and kicking our businessmen and Mafia casino owners off the island.
We traded a dictator in a uniform for another dictator in a different uniform. And we helped create them both.
We traded a dictator in a uniform for another dictator in a different uniform. And we helped create them both.
Nowhere did I say Castro was any better. But its hard to fault the revolution when we were clearly propping up a corrupt regime. Maybe Castro comes to power earlier? Maybe he never comes to power at all?
Another object lesson on why we should stay out of other peoples affairs.
So Batista and Castro were BOTH wrong. I can live with that. 
As for the Klingons in DSC's time: I sympathize with Kol. I hope we see him again. Anybody who can put T'Mushmouth in his place is OK in my book!
As for the Klingons in DSC's time: I sympathize with Kol. I hope we see him again. Anybody who can put T'Mushmouth in his place is OK in my book!
^ No, actually, it's not even that.
Then why do we arrest, detain and sometimes execute spies if it isn't illegal?
https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=31791
In 1917, during World War I, the U.S. passed the Espionage Act. The law has been amended many times over the years, but it was intended to prohibit interference with military operations or recruitment efforts, to prevent insubordination in the military, and to bar the support of enemy states.
In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Schenck v. United States held unanimously that the Espionage Act did not violate the U.S. Constitutional First Amendment right to free speech. Nevertheless, the law has been repeatedly tested in the courts since its original adoption nearly 100 years ago.
The Espionage Act has been used to charge a number of notable figures with federal criminal acts. Some of the most notable figures changed include German-American socialist congressman and newspaper editor Victor Berger, former Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, communists Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Cablegate whistleblower Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley), and NSA contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden.
The full scope and application of the law is still a matter of some debate. The recent revelation of the federal government's electronic snooping on U.S. citizens for national security purposes has reignited the interest in this body of law. While the Espionage Act likely does not apply to American intelligence gathering outside of the U.S., spying on those within the U.S. may be a violation, particularly if any of that information is shared in anyway with foreign powers. On the other hand, information obtained from some searches would most likely be used in support of convictions of U.S. citizens found to be engaged in intelligence gathering for other countries.
The penalties for conviction under the Espionage Act and other anti-spying laws can range from deportation to incarceration to charges of treason and execution. As a result, if you or someone you know has been charged with a violation of the Espionage Act or another anti-spying law, it is important that you speak with both your local embassy (if not a U.S. citizen) and a local attorney experienced in federal criminal law. To find a local attorney, please visit our Law Firms page at HG.org.
In 1917, during World War I, the U.S. passed the Espionage Act. The law has been amended many times over the years, but it was intended to prohibit interference with military operations or recruitment efforts, to prevent insubordination in the military, and to bar the support of enemy states.
In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Schenck v. United States held unanimously that the Espionage Act did not violate the U.S. Constitutional First Amendment right to free speech. Nevertheless, the law has been repeatedly tested in the courts since its original adoption nearly 100 years ago.
The Espionage Act has been used to charge a number of notable figures with federal criminal acts. Some of the most notable figures changed include German-American socialist congressman and newspaper editor Victor Berger, former Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, communists Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Cablegate whistleblower Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley), and NSA contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden.
The full scope and application of the law is still a matter of some debate. The recent revelation of the federal government's electronic snooping on U.S. citizens for national security purposes has reignited the interest in this body of law. While the Espionage Act likely does not apply to American intelligence gathering outside of the U.S., spying on those within the U.S. may be a violation, particularly if any of that information is shared in anyway with foreign powers. On the other hand, information obtained from some searches would most likely be used in support of convictions of U.S. citizens found to be engaged in intelligence gathering for other countries.
The penalties for conviction under the Espionage Act and other anti-spying laws can range from deportation to incarceration to charges of treason and execution. As a result, if you or someone you know has been charged with a violation of the Espionage Act or another anti-spying law, it is important that you speak with both your local embassy (if not a U.S. citizen) and a local attorney experienced in federal criminal law. To find a local attorney, please visit our Law Firms page at HG.org.
I admit, part of me is on the side of Admiral Pressman and sees the fact Riker and Picard are so self-righteous about honoring the treaty with the Romulans to be asinine.
I feel the same about their prosecution of the Marquis. They don't have to help them but their attitude sucks.
I feel the same about their prosecution of the Marquis. They don't have to help them but their attitude sucks.
If you don't honor an agreement you negotiated with someone else. Why would you expect the other side to honor it?
Self interest. Sometimes a bad treaty is better than a good war.
Kind of an argument which works better when the Romulans don't constantly break theirs, isn't it?
And I lose sympathy for the "but the federation is BETTER" when it's people are suffering for the result.
What did the Romulans break that the Federation didn't? They both go into the neutral zone when it suits their purposes. But the Federation secretly broke a treaty by developing cloaking technology they agreed not to.
I've never understood why the Federation would ever agree not to develop cloaking technology. What did the Federation get out of it?
That said, one of the TNG novels, I think one of the ones where the Borg launch a major attack, the designs for cloaking devices are stored in the computers of Starfleet ships. So if things get really desperate all the Starfleet ships have to do to get a cloaking device is to replicate one.
Actually you could make a strong argument that the phasing cloak developed by Starfleet is so radically different a technology than the standard cloaking device as to be not covered by the treaty.
And IIRC when First Contact came out and the Enterprise-E was being designed for the movie, they gave it a "stealth field" that accomplished the same effect as a cloaking device without violating the treaty. It was mentioned in one of the post First Contact comic books and I remember reading that several of the production staff hoped that capability would show up in a subsequent TNG movie.
Romalins are always breaking treaties. They are without honor.
Similar threads
