Horizons LulzSec and Anonymous team up, plan digital destruction … LulzSec and Anonymous have joined forces, and "any government or agency" is the target. LulzSec and Anonymous have teamed up. Their target? The government. Any government, really. – Christian Science Monitor

Dominant Social Theme: Anarchy spins out of control.

Free-Market Analysis: Not long ago, we wrote how incomprehensible it was that anyone would believe that TWO US military-oriented males would set up lesbian websites unbeknownst to each other and then join forces (each thinking the other was a lesbian) to slam Syria's policies towards women with alternative sexuality. It seemed like a classic psyops to us at the time – the kind in which Western Intel specializes; you could almost hear the giggling of young agents in the background. You can see the editorial we posted here: Gay Ops of American Intel?

Unfortunately, the episode has already passed down the memory hole as we predicted. You can search in vain for a reasonable analysis of this operation in mainstream media. All you will find is pontifications having to do with how it is wrong to adopt the personas of people who don't exist, even with the best of intentions.

Thus we are not surprised at the uncritical coverage that a "merger" between LulzSec and Anonymous is getting. We are instructed to believe that these metaphorical caped avengers met somewhere in a digital ally and decided to wage war against governments everywhere. We are not yet convinced.

The language is suspect. A tweet published to the official LulzSec Twitter page, reportedly informed the world that due to the "merger" – however it is consummated – "anarchy is now." Anarchy? What kind of thinking individual uses that sort of phrase? These individuals, whoever they are, are committed to changing the system as it is. Yet we are supposed to believe they do not even know the basic definition of anarchy?

Anarchy, as has been pointed out regularly on many major alternative media sites, has nothing to do with chaos. Anarchy is the absence of government. And the absence of government, most of it anyway, can be construed as a good thing – presaging MORE logical ways of living with greater prosperity, fewer rules and wars.

But the way LulzSec uses the word, the emphasis is placed, evidently and obviously on chaos. This only provides encouragement of this hoariest of elite sub dominant social themes: "without government, chaos abides and anarchy rules." A strong hand on the rudder is necessary to tame the currents of dystopia and confusion. The entire article, in fact, excerpted above and appearing in the Christian Science Monitor (a shell of the newspaper it once was) partakes of this meme and more.

We don't want to rule out the possibility of course. It could be that two hacking outfits joining together is a logical outcome of the Internet era and what we call the Internet Reformation itself. The idea of threatening – as WikiLeaks has done – to release government "secrets" (most of which are classified to hide illegal and even murderous occurrences from the prying eyes) is actually an innovative one. But we unhappily led the way with some other alternative sites when it came to questioning Julian Assange's bona fides.

We believed he was not what he said he was. And sure enough, in our view WikiLeaks has degenerated into a kind of farce. Its website is down perennially, its lead leaker is in jail in the US and one of Assange's last big announcements was the acquisition of a warmed-over list of names of "tax evaders" who had withheld money from the very governments that Assange was supposedly dedicated to exposing.

We can't help recalling that Anonymous came to the aid of WikiLeaks at one point and published a protocol that allowed hackers to attack enemies of WikiLeaks online. Unfortunately, the protocol (reportedly anyway) was not shielded and those who used it left a clear trail for the authorities to follow. In other words, Anonymous provided a utility that generated numerous arrests for government software sleuths.

We have our suspicions about LulzSec as well. This is a group that supposedly cracked the software defenses of the US Senate but didn't do anything with the resultant information and apparently claimed the hack was simply a kind of lark because those who make up LulzSec don't like the US or its governmental authorities.

The amount of false flags operated by US Intel has picked up lately in our opinion – for purposes of propaganda or control (identifying dissidents). The most telling moment for us recently was the supposed death of Osama bin Laden. We are supposed to believe that US Navy SEALS attacked bin Laden's compound directly with two helicopters when military protocol for this sort of operation demands that you land such noisy aircraft far away so that you do not give up the element of surprise.

The biggest issue stumbling to believing in his recent death has to do with bin Laden's ill health and various credible reports that he died as long as 10 years ago of Marfan's Syndrome. In 2000 he was already on regular kidney dialysis. And they did not take DNA samples of bin Laden's blood on May 1, when the SEALS supposedly killed him. The Obama administration decided not to release photos either. They dropped his body at sea.

Supposedly, the FBI has "turned" one in four hackers in the United States (that seems high to us) and made them informants. What does seem clear is that the military and civilian Intel operations are at an all-time high. This does not surprise us as former Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld declared war on the Internet before he resigned. Rumsfeld is gone but the war continues. False flags are apparently a growing specialty of this "war" against US citizens by those who are pledged to the very citizens they are spying on and attacking.

In defense of LulzSec, the top priority "just announced" is to "steal and leak any classified government information, including email spools and documentation …" But once more doubt creeps in. "Prime targets" according to LulzSec "are banks and other high-ranking establishments." Say what?

It is not unpatriotic to want to challenge what the US has turned into – a putative democracy with 16 separate spy agencies and four undeclared regional wars. A country whose leadership has bankrupted its citizens while endlessly poisoning women and children abroad with endless hostilities aimed at pursuing a war against terror that cannot be won and in a larger sense does not even exist.

Can hacking groups like Anonymous challenge the out-of-control authoritarianism that the Anglosphere's power elite is determined to impose on the West? Western leaders give lip service to democratic transparence but then do not observe it. We would like to believe that the current bout of fascism can be rolled back. We are simply not sure of the credibility of the vehicles that have announced their intentions. We will continue to observe the trend and hope that in time we can confirm the reality of what has been indicated. For now we remain skeptical.