test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Section 31: A necessary evil?

2

Comments

  • gavinrunebladegavinruneblade Member Posts: 3,894 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    That's what Sec. 31 loves to tell people, but why should we belive them in the first place?
    Starfleet intelligence is authorized to do such things, Sec. 31 is simply a bunch of people acting as if they would stand above the law without ANY authorisation by the government or anyone else.
    That's a huge difference, even compared to the tal shiar or the obsidian order which are official intelligence services acting on their governments behalf.

    This group takes the liberty to decide whats best for the federation and acts accordingly (which is assumption of authority at least).
    Their actions are not only criminal but they also endanger federations reputation.


    Personally i am astonished that people feel sympathy for Sec 31.
    These links might help explain it:

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_bias

    Basically, much of the world, and scofi in particular has become cynical if not outright nihilistic. The concept of "necessary evil" appeals to this mindset because of confirmation bias. Their behavior is justified via belief bias, where how likely an outcome SEEMS to be overrules logic.

    Given they ignore or downplay any contrasting data (and anything positive or hopeful is contrasting) you get everything from no more true heroes only grimdark antiheroes or suffering vigilantes who seek venfgeance but call it justice because they can't tell the difference.

    We all see the world through colored glasses. Some see it too positive some to negative. No one, or very very few, see it as it is. Some of these colored glasses make section 31 seem like a source of strength. Those who internalize nihilism look for strength externally.

    Note, this doesn't make such any worse or better than anyone else. As I said, we all wear glasses of one color or another. The exact same two cognitive biases hit those who reject section 31 too.
  • feiqafeiqa Member Posts: 2,410 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    That's what Sec. 31 loves to tell people, but why should we belive them in the first place?
    Starfleet intelligence is authorized to do such things, Sec. 31 is simply a bunch of people acting as if they would stand above the law without ANY authorisation by the government or anyone else.
    That's a huge difference, even compared to the tal shiar or the obsidian order which are official intelligence services acting on their governments behalf.

    This group takes the liberty to decide whats best for the federation and acts accordingly (which is assumption of authority at least).
    Their actions are not only criminal but they also endanger federations reputation.


    Personally i am astonished that people feel sympathy for Sec 31.

    I think you and I debated this on another thread over a year ago.

    The missions Drake sends you on are not counter to Federation or Starfleet. The closest thing to questionable in the first mission chain is the travel back in your ship to blow up the comet. Which he does because you are facing time travelling enemies that can destroy the whole quadrant in the past so you have to take out their tool in the past to preserve the past and the present. So far so good. To keep the risks of contamination to a minimum he provides a holographic disguise for your ship so you look like an independent vessel from the same time period. (Hence no polluting the time line) And he put a way back to the future on your ship with a recording letting you know both good job and that he did so. The only good reason to keep it a secret is so you and your crew can't accidentally tell anyone you have such a device. (okay and the fact it is borg tech may make folks a hair squeamish.)

    The Nimbus arc he sends you after the triggers to set off weapons of mass destruction. At no point telling you how to conduct yourself. Only that these banned items were tracked there and would you please keep them out of enemy or terrorist hands?

    They keep being talked about like a true shadow conspiracy ala the Illuminati or the like. But act more like a Federation intelligence service as opposed to Starfleet Intelligence. The difference being CIA vs Military intelligence. CIA has more resources and contacts that the military can't maintain and may not mean anything to a military.

    Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
    Network engineers are not ship designers.
    Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
  • kazisakikazisaki Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    oh wow :O when i posted this i didnt expect it to get so much attention. But just looking through these posts i can see such a wide variety of opinions on this topic. more or less confirming what i believed that there should be some further options. while the majority (good on ya) is mostly anti S31, there are those that tilt a little towards the grey and then to full on flag waving patriotism for S31.

    Granted my alien character probobly wouldnt support them, i've basically envisioned him as some form of shapeshifter (Chameloid or Alasomorph not a founder(multiple races for my alt outfits)) but he generally only appears as an Andorian. though my delta recruit i envision him supporting them since his starfleet tenure began with klingons killing his captain, ESD being destroyed by the undine and the impending iconian war he was warned about by himself, he would see the merit. my Fed Rommie would be a mix of too drunk to care or VERY vocal in opposition because of the tal'shiar.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • gavinrunebladegavinruneblade Member Posts: 3,894 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I think that having sec 31 in game and in the shows is a brilliant idea. Your thread is good and has shown why. People care about sec 31. Some are largely ambivalent to them, but most seem to be passionate one way or another.

    To me, this is good. As long as it stays polite. Which it mostly does.
  • lordvalecortezlordvalecortez Member Posts: 479 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Sometimes you need people to do things that the official government can't be seen doing. How much control the government has over those people will never be known because they aren't and can't be officially recognized and sanctioned by said government. That would defeat the purpose.

    Every governing body will have its people who do the dirty jobs. Not everyone can be a squeaky clean Starfleet officer. Not everyone can live a civilian life style. Someone has to go out and join Starfleet so that the civilians can have their happy little life. And within Starfleet some people have to be recruited to the darker side of things so the rest of SF can have their happy little adventures exploring places or jumping through time and proving how bad the Temporal Agency is at their jobs.

    I'd say Section 31 is as necessary and evil as every organization is. It's just that they are on the darker side of the spectrum.
    Cheers from Antonio Valerio Cortez III, Half-Celestial Archduke of the Free Marches Confederacy.
  • greyhame3greyhame3 Member Posts: 914 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Whether they are necessary or not depends on if you can accept the idea of Paradise in Star Trek without it.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    An "Intelligence Service" without oversight is bad. (It's not really a intelligence service, it's just a conspiracy group). I think one would be justified in saying it's evil.

    An intelligence service in general might be necessary, since we don't live in a perfect world. But it must be under control and oversight.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • valianttomevalianttome Member Posts: 157 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    yreodred wrote: »
    That's what Sec. 31 loves to tell people, but why should we belive them in the first place?
    Starfleet intelligence is authorized to do such things, Sec. 31 is simply a bunch of people acting as if they would stand above the law without ANY authorisation by the government or anyone else.
    That's a huge difference, even compared to the tal shiar or the obsidian order which are official intelligence services acting on their governments behalf.

    This group takes the liberty to decide whats best for the federation and acts accordingly (which is assumption of authority at least).
    Their actions are not only criminal but they also endanger federations reputation.


    Personally i am astonished that people feel sympathy for Sec 31.

    I like the idea of Section 31. Not because they're a necessary evil. But because they are out side the box when it comes to the norm of the Federation. This organization made up of more than just one or two people. And they believe that what they do is necessary, whether its morally right or wrong is another story and completely unimportant to why I like them.

    If Picard, Kirk and others are to be believed. The Federation is a morally and ethically superior society. And those like Franklin Drake are outliers in their society. But the truth is for an organization as wide reaching, effective and long lasting as Section 31. Picard and Kirk arent being completely honest. So my opinion is that the Federation isnt all sunshine, rainbows and unicorns. Theres a fair share of the population that doesnt believe they should be running around unknown space announcing its presence and giving real threats to the Federations Society the opportunity to move on the Federation.

    You can argue up and down that on a moral and ethical level Section 31 are bad guys. And you wouldnt be wrong. But when youre talking about two factions or more moving their assets around like pawns on a chess board. Maybe the Federation is better off leaving those immoral and unethical choices to Section 31. Atleast the Federation has deniability and a clean conscious in regards to what Section 31 does.

    Section 31 makes the Federation more interesting. And less one sided as they were in TOS and TNG.
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Section 31 is nothing more than a silly plot device as an all-knowing, ever conspiring Illuminati-like organization. In STO, it gets ridiculously stupid and worse than even the also-silly STO Tal Shiar.

    Capt Kim had the runs today. Maybe it was a plot by Section 31 because he refused to accept a Fed-Ex mission to deliver cupcakes to someone of (secret) importance that the fate of the Federation rested upon.
    XzRTofz.gif
  • medalionemissarymedalionemissary Member Posts: 612 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I loved Section 31... as with most things DS9 introduced

    Going against the grain of established perfect future Star Trek from time to time is a great thing

    It was one of the only things that peaked my interest in the last JJ Abrahms abortion of a movie
    Deep Space Nine in HD, make it so!
  • hunteralpha84hunteralpha84 Member Posts: 524 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I wish you could join section 31...
  • feiqafeiqa Member Posts: 2,410 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    On section 31 as a whole and its place in 'paradise' The paradise preached about is a veneer. Not because it is a flawed desire or concept. But because the galaxy is a dangerous place. Yeah sounds like a Sec 31 recruitment add, but if we want to answer about necessary evils. Why do you have standard on your ships phasers and photon torpedoes? If you are all perfect and happy and at peace, does the starfeet need to be armed? Because the galaxy is not a nice place and there really are forces out there that would burn the planet Earth down to the mantle for grins. So to make those people think twice the Starfleet is armed and armed well.
    Section 31 is an intelligence agency. Do they plot and scheme. Yeah about as much as anyone gathering dangerous information does. They are not military intelligence they are a force gathering various forms of data from multiple sources. They then ask Starfleet resources to handle the bits needing attention.

    Skirmish. Section 31 did not know about dimensional invaders. What they saw was cardassians and Klingons converging on a system outside the usual stomping grounds for cardassians and asked you to join a group already heading to intercept and see what is going on. After the new threat is revealed works with you to fix that threat and steps away.
    Nimbus, reveals they have found a shipment of stolen and illegal thalaron detonators. You might want to get them back. Tal Shiar have a listening post in the desert. . . Well you might want to go in and see what they are doing.

    Yes I see, totally evil and we should eliminate them all. How dare a group want to stop a sector of space from being taken and eaten. And maybe those terrorists want those triggers so they can make their sun look like a daisey.

    Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
    Network engineers are not ship designers.
    Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Section 31 is nothing more than a silly plot device as an all-knowing, ever conspiring Illuminati-like organization. In STO, it gets ridiculously stupid and worse than even the also-silly STO Tal Shiar.

    Capt Kim had the runs today. Maybe it was a plot by Section 31 because he refused to accept a Fed-Ex mission to deliver cupcakes to someone of (secret) importance that the fate of the Federation rested upon.

    So much this! Thank you :D
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I feel that Section 31...was sloppily put into STO. Seriously, remove them, and just make it a normal intel officer. Romulans and Klingons get normal intel officers for that.

    Anyways...Section 31 is evil. A necessary evil? I'm not sure to be honest. On one end they claim to take care of threats in secret, and without anyone knowing. On the other, they would never TELL someone what they've taken care of, due to their very nature as a secretive organization. So you could never really think as to whether or not they are telling the truth.

    In terms of how they were shown in DS9, I always felt that they, or at the very least, Sloan, was a 'wheels within wheels within wheels' type.

    Like with manipulating Bashir to try and investigate into Koval, only for him to end up getting Senator Cretak charged with treason, as Koval was a mole for Section 31.

    Or the biggest thing they are 'known for': Trying to commit genocide on the Founders.

    Make no mistake on how I feel: They tried to still commit GENOCIDE. I'm not ignoring that in the slightest.

    BUT.

    How much at face-value can we take Sloan in regards to it? After all, the virus still had a cure in the end. Hell, it was a notoriously simple cure (I don't remember the exact bit atm), yet had baffled Vorta scientists for the 3 years since the Founders had gotten it.

    Even Bashir had eventually given up, having no idea how to cure it. Though apparently S-31, or at least Sloan had enough belief that Bashir COULD figure out the cure that he wasted no time in coming to DS9. And Sloan himself knew said cure.

    So I honestly wonder, could they have been holding back on the cure, to possibly use as a bargaining chip if necessary? After all, if you are only wanting to commit genocide, why make a disease that can be cured (and again, a very simple cure to boot).

    I'm not dismissing they still tried to commit genocide, merely that they have never been the 'over the top' types, never the 'send them a message' type either, compared to the Tal Shiar and Obsidian Order.
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    mimey2 wrote: »
    (...)

    I'm not dismissing they still tried to commit genocide, merely that they have never been the 'over the top' types, never the 'send them a message' type either, compared to the Tal Shiar and Obsidian Order.

    Retroactively you can try to reason, of course (although in that case there's really nothing to ethically justify their practices in my opinion). I mean ENT basically tried to reconcile them as the American audience longed for figures like these. Shady, but determined, "doing what has to be done" types. In DS9, however, their intentions were clear. They were villians - hell, they wear TRIBBLE atire. And this is not just a coincidence, their costumes have deliberately designed to resemble SS/Gestapo coats because that's what they were supposed to be. I am baffled that such a concept became somewhat reconciled and even admired a decade or so later.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • theredcomettheredcomet Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    In STO starfleet behaves even worse than section 31.
    You may as well abolish the prime directive in the STO-verse and disperse the federation council.

    It's a communist dictatorship.
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I think Q said it best.

    Capt. Picard: I understand what you've done here, Q. But I think the lesson could have been learned without the loss of 18 members of my crew.

    Q: If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

    Section 31 protects the Federation citizens from the invisible dangers that lurk in space so they can have a nice rest and sometimes that requires an unethical approach.
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 9,205 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    starkaos wrote: »
    I think Q said it best.

    Capt. Picard: I understand what you've done here, Q. But I think the lesson could have been learned without the loss of 18 members of my crew.

    Q: If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid.

    Section 31 protects the Federation citizens from the invisible dangers that lurk in space so they can have a nice rest and sometimes that requires an unethical approach.

    Starfleet had been doing a fine enough job of protecting the Federation from every conceivable kind of threat that had come their way.

    Section 31 is only a silly plot device of convenience.
    XzRTofz.gif
  • stofskstofsk Member Posts: 1,744 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I actually like the idea of Section 31. In DS9 they were never really established as being an organisation. Implied, yes, but never firmly established. You could for instance assume that Sloan was the leader of Section 31. Or, and this was a plot point in 'Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges', you could assume that Sloan was a rogue agent who concocted this Section 31 mystique because intelligence agents are prevaricating arseholes. Or that the whole 'Section 31' thing was just a method to give Starfleet's version of Special Circumstances a plausible deniability.

    The problem I think is with the Star Trek EU where EVERYTHING and the kitchen sink was caused by, instigated by or responded to by Section 31. And I think THAT'S where the execution fails. If Section 31 was a real organisation then people would take it seriously. People in authority really, really don't like 'rogue' agents and such the like; for one thing, 'rogue' agents have broken the institution's own laws, let alone the laws of the nation-state they belong to. If on the other hand it was just a black op section of Starfleet Intelligence, then things become greyer, more nuanced, more interesting. Our heroes can be sparkling clean, but that doesn't mean every person who works for the Federation needs to be.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    stofsk wrote: »
    I actually like the idea of Section 31. In DS9 they were never really established as being an organisation. Implied, yes, but never firmly established. You could for instance assume that Sloan was the leader of Section 31. Or, and this was a plot point in 'Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges', you could assume that Sloan was a rogue agent who concocted this Section 31 mystique because intelligence agents are prevaricating arseholes. Or that the whole 'Section 31' thing was just a method to give Starfleet's version of Special Circumstances a plausible deniability.
    That's a good point. If Section 31 doesn't officially exist, how do we know it exists at all? It could be just a bunch of terrorists pretending to be an intelligence agency to gain support.
  • mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Retroactively you can try to reason, of course (although in that case there's really nothing to ethically justify their practices in my opinion). I mean ENT basically tried to reconcile them as the American audience longed for figures like these. Shady, but determined, "doing what has to be done" types. In DS9, however, their intentions were clear. They were villians - hell, they wear TRIBBLE atire. And this is not just a coincidence, their costumes have deliberately designed to resemble SS/Gestapo coats because that's what they were supposed to be. I am baffled that such a concept became somewhat reconciled and even admired a decade or so later.

    Ent did a lot of things wrong, including how they portrayed Section 31. And also why it bugs me that JJ used Section 31, but as little more than a namedrop that a vast majority of the very people watching the movie would've never gotten.

    Now, by no means am I trying to justify their actions. Irregardless of any other factors, genocide is still genocide, among any other terrible things they might've done in the past.

    I do see what you mean about the TRIBBLE attire of course.

    All that aside, I'm a big fan of Dune, so where others can see it so 'cut and dry' a 'good vs bad' kind of deal, I see the group as a 'plans within plans' type, carefully moving and manipulating chess pieces, ONLY coming out when absolutely necessary. Again, not trying to justify their actions, merely how I see them.

    There is a BIG difference between admiring a villain for being deep, well-written, multi-faceted, and otherwise interesting to watch...compared to admiring a villain and bending over backwards to constantly justify ANYTHING they did. Like say, the perfect example in one: Gul Dukat.
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • oldravenman3025oldravenman3025 Member Posts: 1,892 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Retroactively you can try to reason, of course (although in that case there's really nothing to ethically justify their practices in my opinion). I mean ENT basically tried to reconcile them as the American audience longed for figures like these. Shady, but determined, "doing what has to be done" types. In DS9, however, their intentions were clear. They were villians - hell, they wear TRIBBLE atire. And this is not just a coincidence, their costumes have deliberately designed to resemble SS/Gestapo coats because that's what they were supposed to be. I am baffled that such a concept became somewhat reconciled and even admired a decade or so later.






    Black uniforms do not necessarily imply any association/comparison with the NSDAP. That's a common misconception.


    Black attire can also imply both "bad guys" and/or "secretive". In others words, the stereotypical "black hats" from old westerns, and super-secret "black" organizations (such as the mythological "Men in Black" among conspiracy buffs).



    Section 31 has less of a National Socialist vibe, and more of a "Men in Black" feel. They're an ultra-secret black ops agency/group that operates outside the law, for whatever reason. Their true agendas are uncertain, and they can be working for the greater good or for some nefarious purpose down the line. And anybody who speaks of them openly will generally be labeled paranoid or a conspiracy theorist. Hardly anybody knew they existed prior to the game's timeline. And in the game, many still doubt they even exist except as, in the words of Commander DeSoto, "A mythological bogeyman organization".



    Section 31 is not only a plot device, but a symbol created by DS9's writers to fit in with the slightly darker themes of that show. A symbol that conveys the message that every "paradise" has it's "serpent". Whether or not that is a good or bad thing is determined by individual point of view.



    Me personally? I'm not fond of a bunch of super-sekret squirrels running around willy-nilly. But their actions in Deep Space Nine and Star Trek Online have been, ultimately, for the Federation's benefit and long term safety. One cannot argue their effectiveness compared to more "open" agencies in the UFP, even if you take the same ideological path as the main characters.


    The problem, however, is "who watches the watchers"? Groups like Section 31 have a bad tendency to "go bad" (going from stalwart defenders to shadowy oppressors), or commit acts that they feel is for the best, but seriously backfire in a big way. The organization is still, despite their supposed omnipotence, made up of flawed individuals just like the rest of us.
  • themetalstickmanthemetalstickman Member Posts: 1,010 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    My two EC:

    We have seen S31 as determined by the Section 31 of the Federation Charter for which they are named (this discounts ENT) exactly three times in canon in the prime timeline. In these appearances, the only operatives we see are Sloan and a few of his men. IMO, the only time they do anything definitely wrong (as opposed to gray) is the disease with which they infect the Founders, and that operation appears to have been masterminded by Sloan. This could be chalked up to a bad leader, as could the actions of Admiral Marcus in the alternate timeline. As far as I'm concerned, Franklin Drake is not nearly the same as Sloan. He doesn't ask me to do anything that is morally wrong, and he doesn't do anything that I can't see Commander Burgess doing.

    And his plans always come off better than Rai Sahen's. :D
    Og12TbC.jpg

    Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including your mother's, and yours.

    I dare you to do better.
  • thunderfoot#5163 thunderfoot Member Posts: 4,545 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Section 31 is the Tal Shiar without points on their ears.

    Why is it whenever the Good Guys have a group like this, it is okay, but the same group which supports the Bad Guys is very Ebil? Section 31 are UFP patriots. The Tal Shiar are dirty spies.

    Sooner or later, Section 31 will find themselves at odds with the rest of the Federation on how to resolve an issue where the survival of the Federation is at stake. Section 31 will choose the expedient path which tidies up the dirty laundry fastest while creating more problems. Which Starfleet will then have to correct or get involved in at great cost in time, personnel, and resources.

    Never really understood the fascination some folks have with having 007 as a part of the Federation.

    James T. Kirk didn't need 007 to take care of business. Benjamin Sisko did, though.

    Hmmmm..... kinda says somethin' about talents and abilities, don't it? Along with scriptwriting. :D
    A six year old boy and his starship. Living the dream.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Black uniforms do not necessarily imply any association/comparison with the NSDAP. That's a common misconception.


    Black attire can also imply both "bad guys" and/or "secretive". In others words, the stereotypical "black hats" from old westerns, and super-secret "black" organizations (such as the mythological "Men in Black" among conspiracy buffs).

    (...)


    They have deliberately been designed to resemble TRIBBLE attire, that's in the very production notes. Like I said, it's not a coincidence, it is intentional :)
    Costume Designer Bob Blackman noted that the uniforms worn by Section 31 agents were chosen for their fascist overtones. "We design a lot of Gestapo / S.S / Naziesque outfits for our villains. And when they're really the ultimate, like the Section 31 people, we immediately go that way to make them look like storm troopers, because that's an imagery that works best, not only for the viewers, but for the producers. For 'Inquisition,' Ira asked for dark black, severe, hostile looking garments. Well, that's black leather." (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion, p. 553)
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,166 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    There are probably infinite examples of situations where you can justify an organization like Section 31, and there are plenty of moral reasons why you can say they shouldn't exist. Which outweighs the other? That would depend on how personally you are affected by them existing, or not. If your child's life is on the line, people want them to do whatever they have to do. If it is someone else's child, maybe not. So there is no definitive answer to a question like this. It's really just debate bait :P

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • cptjhuntercptjhunter Member Posts: 2,288 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Is section 31 a necessary evil? Maybe, maybe not.


    Doesn't change the fact, I want to shoot Franklin Drake in the face.
  • oldravenman3025oldravenman3025 Member Posts: 1,892 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    They have deliberately been designed to resemble TRIBBLE attire, that's in the very production notes. Like I said, it's not a coincidence, it is intentional :)



    If that's the case, then they didn't do a very good job of it. Nothing about Section 31 screams "TRIBBLE" other than the fact that both groups liked snappy black uniforms. Chalk it up to one more thing that didn't work as intended in an otherwise excellent Trek installment.



    Because unless you read the production notes, the average viewer wouldn't get that impression. They're just another "bad guy" wearing black attire in one form or another.




    I'm something of an amateur military historian, with one of my interests being the Third Reich. And I didn't get such an impression. Like I said before, the final product comes across as being more like the mythological, sinister "Men in Black" than the Geheime Staatspolizei or Allgemeine SS. Like the modern conspiracy bogeyman, Section 31 is shadowy, doesn't officially exist, is the product of denial and conspiracy theories (or dismissed as such), weaves nearly infallible plots and schemes, has highly secret connections with the more open military and political establishments, threatens people into silence, and operates outside of most legal parameters. The only thing missing is the accusations of Section 31 being some sort of "shadow government" secretly running the Federation.



    That, and the fact that instead of flying saucers and little green men, Section 31 deals mostly with TRIBBLE that would considered normal, daily business by most real-world intelligence agencies at the higher levels. And unlike the big joke known as Starfleet Intelligence, doesn't make a habit of dropping the ball when carrying out classified ops that are of a more sensitive nature.
  • daggermoondaggermoon Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    i think someone from the ds9 writers liked the book death's angel and adapted it poorely for use in an episode and poof s31

    ssd

    s31
  • spyralpegacyonspyralpegacyon Member Posts: 408 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    cptjhunter wrote: »
    Doesn't change the fact, I want to shoot Franklin Drake in the face.

    I'm KDF, I'll gladly punch him.
    tumblr_n1hmq4Xl7S1rzu2xzo2_400.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.