Spec Ops FAQ

The Spec Ops FAQ exists to provide a common basis of general knowledge to all agents of Spec Ops. Submit additions or corrections to Lydia Lee Cantrell. The FAQ is a work in progress.


Most people you would meet on the streets of any place you happen to be do not know any of what you are about to read. While most of those people could probably handle knowing this reasonably well, there is a minority who would react very badly – either for themselves specifically (nervous breakdowns, insanity etc.) or for the society they live in (anti-social / criminal / evil behaviour to try and exploit what they have learned, or to radically disbelieve it).

For this reason – it is the absolute policy of Spec Ops that the un-enlightened (as in people who don’t know any of this) should remain un-enlightened if at all possible. You are reading this because it is
part of our job (and thus now your job) to deal with these matters and defend our worlds against malicious actions by persons who are also enlightened.

The chain of command who are enlightened outside of Spec Ops is extremely short. In general it does not include any of the rest of the Dept. of Defense, or the FBI, or the CIA, or any other of our alphabet
soup organizations, even Homeland Security.

Please do your best to keep the un-enlightened in that same state. The pleasant alternative is that we would have to recruit them into Spec Ops. It is not the only alternative that we might be required to employ.

Colonel Philip Broyles. Director of Operations, Special Operations, Dept of Defense.

History of Spec Ops
Piloting 101


  1. Few of us have an entire picture, but having read through the posts so far, the information provided strikes me as being so incomplete as to be problematic or oversimplified in places. Hopefully this will be remedied with time, but in the interim I’d suggest this be taken with a grain of salt.

    I do applaud Lydia’s effort and good intentions.

    A suggestion, you may want a section on Spec Ops facilities for the newcomers.

    In terms of just this page…

    There is a definite propaganda slant in terms of keeping people “unenlightened”. This policy may well prove to be the most disastrous for St. James in the long term in terms of defense of the planet. This ignorance is exploited by off world powers for their own benefit on a frequent basis.

    The non enlightenment policy confers most benefit to those who control St. James in terms recognizable to other aware realms. Presently, only a handful of individuals connected with St. James have any legal standing or rights in the broader multiverse. A consideration for anyone who chooses to support this policy should be whether they ever expect humanity on St. James to be anything more than a colonial world with limited local autonomy and sham governments. A useful historical analogy would be British India during the Raj, with St. James being the native Indians and no Gandhi yet on the scene. The arguments for keeping St. James in the dark very much follow the same paternalistic and exploitative template used by the British in justifying colonial rule.

    The policy is also no where near as well executed as the post makes out.

    Its absolutely possible to be on St. James, be enlightened, and not be a member of Spec Ops. I am a good example…I’m not a member and I’m still breathing and regularly spend time on world. There are many thousands of my relatives on St. James who are similarly aware and not Spec Ops members. Cousin Jenny is our only currently serving Spec Ops member at the moment.

    “It is not the only alternative that we might be required to employ.” Is more bluster than not. I’m certain Spec Ops wouldn’t hesitate to try to kill someone enlightened that they didn’t like or found inconvenient, but it remains to be seen if they have the manpower or firepower to make it stick in any but the most mundane cases.

    Generally they have trouble disciplining or confining their own agents and their effort to confine a high ranking Gou’ald was a complete fiasco with him running on world intelligence gathering from his high security cell using remote communications platforms in between entertaining “interrogations” by US officials. When the communications platforms were discovered, the game suddenly became less interesting and the Gou’ald simple exited custody.

    The ability to identify and locate enlightened persons and off world nationals is not well demonstrated, nor is the complete ignorance of the larger reality true of all members in other branches of government or other on world governments.

    It is definitely the case that the CIA has previously been infiltrated by agents of Amber in the form of Caine and his son, and that the agency has been unofficially known as “Caine’s Intelligence Agency” by those in on the joke.

    There have been confirmed instances of high ranking members of the US government and the US military being either subverted by, agents for, or representatives of foreign powers working covertly against St. James.

    St. James has previously been a ‘vacation destination’ for slumming Amberites and Chaosians, Amberites taking advantage of academic opportunities, or those cutting their teeth on their first world domination projects. The Ghost Project is one example of a group of college aged Amberites and Chaosians whose political science/IT/AI/technology project went horribly wrong.

    Amber still maintains an Embassy in New York and has an Ambassadorial presence here. There are a few ex-pats from Amber that have homes and property on St. James.

    The Gou’ald and Federation have infiltrators on world still, and for a time you could find them on the streets of LA without too much effort, and even, sadly, within El Toro itself.

    Thus far, the only demonstrated effect of the non enlightenment policy has been the extent to which it facilitates predation by off-worlders: harvesting of humans for food and ritual sacrifice, theft of critical military assets, and slave traders.

  2. Without you, the FAQ wouldn’t have been produced. I don’t think there are any failings, simply things that will need extra work. As a first FAQ, it is an excellent piece of work.


  3. Gudrun, I’m a new recruit, so I am finding I have to ask a lot of questions. It appears from your postings that a) you are not a member of Spec Ops; b) you are not a strong ally of Spec Ops; and c) you don’t seem to even particularly like or respect the mandate or members of Spec Ops.

    So, in what role are your exercising commentary and oversight within this community? Has Spec Ops hired you as an operational change consultant?

  4. Operational or organizational change consultant? LOL I’ll have to look into that as a new career field, its a great suggestion.

    My profile is on the Wiki so you can read up on me a bit there if you’d like.

    I was initially slotted to join Spec OPs as a replacement for my cousin Ani Erikson after her murder. I served two missions with Spec Ops and came to the conclusion that many of my cousin’s notes and observations on the group had not been addressed by the leadership change. I resigned after it became clear to me that the present climate in the organization caused me to be concerned that continued service would be in conflict with my principles or lead to me becoming implicated in potentially criminal or treasonous behaviors.

    Given my affiliation with the Servants of the Light, many in the group find me to be untrustworthy and suspect. They have not forgiven the Servants of the Light for the chastisement of Spec Ops members and the death of Professor Aetius. This animus has transferred itself to me.

    I have also been rather outspoken in my critique of the group. This has annoyed several members of the group.

    I have no role at Spec Ops at this point. One can only guess at Col Broyles’ motivation for not having had his IT department deny my access to the boards, but perhaps he is hoping to leverage my observations and occasional comments for intelligence value.

    You are quite free to ignore my commentary. Many do.

    In terms of liking…there are many people I may personally like, but one problem with Spec Ops is that too many view it as a social club rather than a professional endeavor. Liking has been the rule, friendship and personal loyalty have trumped ethics and standards. It is not acceptable to excuse murder and treason, and dangerously poor judgement on the basis of personal friendship, that has been the group norm to date.

    In my view, this is not appropriate. Most do not share my view on this.

    In terms of the mandate for secrecy, it is strategically and tactically a barrier to the defense of St. James. It cannot be supported in a context of world defense.

    In a context of St. James autonomy and self governance, in my view it is immoral and in conflict with the principles of democracy and the U S Constitution…thus it is in conflict with the oath that all Spec Ops officers ought to be taking when they join.

    I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (the last may be omitted by those whose religious views or lack of them form an objection)

    This oath is the one taken by military officers on commissioning and FBI agents. There are also numerous laws and articles of the USC which apply to agent conduct, and UCMJ articles which refer to military conduct. These are ignored in this organization.

    So, I have no role. I hold no office. I hold no title. You are quite free to ignore me at will.

Join the Conversation