I reached out to him, he responded, we've been talking - and i owe you a major thanks. I appreciate it much. And yes, i think that oddly, some people are emerging who are eager to set the record straight, such as it is, b/c of Parmy's book. Did you read it? I am about 2/3 of the way through and like it - it's heavily reported. But then I'm reading it as someone who didn't know much of this stuff, so I'm not in the position to judge accuracy. Curious what your thoughts are when/if you read it.

J.

Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman

-----Original Message-----

From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Thu 5/31/2012 7:09 PM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: help

You can simply copy and paste the Arabic into Google translate to see
what it means, although I doubt it's anything significant. I'm not
sure exactly what the one million dollar reference is, unless it has
something to do with Stratfor and the money Sabu is alleged to have
requested from Wikileaks for the e-mails, although it may very well be
something else. But this person was earlier using the hashtag
#insideinfo or something and seems to be motivated by the appearance
of Parmy Olson's book and other such things that he feels (probably
correctly) contain mistaken information or give off mistaken
impressions, so I'd imagine he'd be willing to talk if he decides
you're in a position to set anything straight.

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Reitman, Janet
<Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:
> Interesting, i just sent him a note on Twitter but i notice he has an arabic
> and english thing - i have no idea what the arabic says, do you? also, what
> are they talking about w/r/t the "one million dollar thing"? ...
>
>
>
> Janet Reitman
> Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone
>
> office: 718 285 9394
> cell: 917 447 4843
> email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
> Twitter: @janetreitman
> Skype: janetreitman
>
>
>
> This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its affiliates. It may
> be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use
> of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or otherwise
> reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by any
> individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
> message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the taking
> of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify
> the sender and delete this message. Thank you.
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thu 5/31/2012 2:13 AM
> To: Reitman, Janet
> Subject: Re: help
>
>
> That's not something that anyone is going to be able to answer with
> any certainty, other than Hammond himself. The odds are that they
> simply met on IRC at some point, as Sabu had tons of "incoming
> contacts" like anyone else who was well-known in the movement. How
> exactly the two met would unlikely have come up in any conversation
> very often, if at all, much less among anyone who is still free, or
> even going under the same name. Basically, the few people I would
> think of that could even potentially answer it have all been arrested
> and probably wouldn't know themselves, nor would they be inclined to
> answer my questions -especially now that I've been raided by the FBI
> and thus "compromised." And even in general, finding out how and when
> a particular person got involved in Anon is almost impossible without
> getting a truthful answer from the person involved, even when such a
> person went only under one nickname, as opposed to the countless
> nicknames Hammond used. There are questions I myself have about
> certain things, and which I'm not able to find answers to, simply
> because Hammond and Sabu were the only two people in that variable
> "core" of Antisec (as opposed to Lulzsec) that I dealt with or ever
> met.
>
> The only lead I can give you in terms of anyone who might know these
> things and be willing to talk is this person who's recently popped up
> on a Twitter account, @antiprosec, and who seems to be intent on
> "setting the record straight" insomuch as that he keeps tweeting about
> what happened in Antisec and seems to have liked Hammond, whom he
> knows as sup_g according to a tweet he just put out. I would suggest
> sending him a message via Twitter and asking him to e-mail you.
>
>
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Reitman, Janet
> <Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:
>> Hey Barrett,
>>
>> So I need your help - please. Somehow, I need to find a person, or persons
>> who can tell me how Jeremy Hammond ( anarchaos/tylerknowsthis/burn/sup_g -
>> whatever, he had a millions nicknames) met Sabu. It's a huge hole in my
>> story - which is largely about Hammond, his history of activism and so
>> forth, but the part about how he got involved with Anon, how he met Sabu
>> and
>> was drawn into the #AntiSec thing is a huge mystery. None of Jeremy's real
>> life friends can answer this as they are largely clueless about
>> hacktivism.
>>
>> So i am appealing to you and your many contacts - thinking there must be
>> someone in your network who could help answer a few of these questions,
>> anonymously. This would all be strictly on background, but it's just
>> essential. Can you think of anyone or could you reach out to a few people
>> who might be able to help?
>>
>> I'd hugely appreciate it. Let me know.
>>
>> Thanks so much -
>> Janet
>>
>>
>> Janet Reitman
>> Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone
>>
>> office: 718 285 9394
>> cell: 917 447 4843
>> email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
>> Twitter: @janetreitman
>> Skype: janetreitman
>>
>>
>>
>> This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its affiliates. It may
>> be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use
>> of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or
>> otherwise
>> reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by
>> any
>> individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
>> message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
>> unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the
>> taking
>> of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly
>> prohibited.
>> If you have received this communication in error, please immediately
>> notify
>> the sender and delete this message. Thank you.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>
>> From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Fri 5/25/2012 8:27 PM
>> To: Reitman, Janet
>> Subject: Re: Barrett here
>>
>> This might be useful to you, though; I just made it public today:
>> http://pastebin.com/39efLk07
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I have no way of knowing. I only learned that it was happening more
>>> than a week after it had begun, and I never asked who had originated
>>> the idea.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Reitman, Janet
>>> <Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:
>>>> Hey Barrett -
>>>>
>>>> Quick question: whose idea was it to target STratfor? And why stratfor?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Janet Reitman
>>>> Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone
>>>>
>>>> office: 718 285 9394
>>>> cell: 917 447 4843
>>>> email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
>>>> Twitter: @janetreitman
>>>> Skype: janetreitman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Sat 4/21/2012 6:48 AM
>>>> To: Reitman, Janet
>>>> Subject: Re: Barrett here
>>>>
>>>> I agree, and Keith Alexander obviously overstated the threat when we he
>>>> came out with the idea that Anon would be taking out power stations in
>>>> two
>>>> years. They're going to try to to take advantage of what they can for
>>>> their
>>>> own purposes, of course.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Reitman, Janet <
>>>> Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> **
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I just wonder if the FBI hasn't exaggerated the threat here - true
>>>>> Lulzsec
>>>>> made US security look bad, but aside from the HB Gary hack, and maybe
>>>>> Stratfor, exactly how much real damage they caused is a question. It's
>>>>> one
>>>>> thing to say you can do something and thumb your nose at authorities;
>>>>> it's
>>>>> another to do serious destruction and pose a real threat.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Janet Reitman
>>>>> Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone
>>>>>
>>>>> office: 718 285 9394
>>>>> cell: 917 447 4843
>>>>> email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
>>>>> Twitter: @janetreitman
>>>>> Skype: janetreitman
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com
>>>>> <barriticus@gmail.com>]
>>>>> Sent: Fri 4/20/2012 5:45 PM
>>>>> To: Reitman, Janet
>>>>> Subject: Re: Barrett here
>>>>>
>>>>> Assange has been the greatest single threat for a while, and probably
>>>>> remains so. The Lulzsec guys did some damage to our cause by virtue of
>>>>> some
>>>>> of their more pointless acts, but managed to make U.S. security look
>>>>> bad
>>>>> in
>>>>> general and occasionally got some real info that mattered. But before
>>>>> Lulzsec, Sabu and Kayla had hit HBGary, which ended up providing
>>>>> unprecedented raw material by which people like myself could paint a
>>>>> picture of the contracting industry. So Sabu in particular was still a
>>>>> major potential threat until he was turned. There are other, quieter
>>>>> hackers of the sort who don't deface websites but only go for data, but
>>>>> I
>>>>> don't know much about them and I'm not sure what the FBI may know of
>>>>> them.
>>>>> David House, with whom I'm friendly, is always getting spied on due to
>>>>> his
>>>>> association with Manning. Jacob Applebaum is also under perpetual
>>>>> observation. Apparently I was considered an ongoing threat by many of
>>>>> these
>>>>> companies and their FBI buddies by virtue of having kept the issue
>>>>> alive,
>>>>> pulling out a few more secrets like Romas/COIN, and my unusual media
>>>>> access; but even after being raided, I can still do my thing, which is
>>>>> entirely legal, at least until they come with up some bullshit
>>>>> "conspiracy
>>>>> to" grey area thing or whatever else they're planning on charging me
>>>>> with.
>>>>> I know that since my warrant lists Lulzsec and the company Infraguard -
>>>>> neither of which I had anything to do with, other than talking to
>>>>> Topiary
>>>>> and a couple of the hangers-on - they're getting at least some confused
>>>>> information on my role.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Reitman, Janet <
>>>>> Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > **
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > hey thanks - will read now.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > So here two questions i have, curious if you had any ideas on this:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Who is/was the FBI's Most Wanted in this whole cyber/anon world? -
>>>>> > and
>>>>> > if
>>>>> > it's Assange, then who's next after him?
>>>>> > Any idea where the Lulzsec guys ranked on that scale of most wanted?
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Janet Reitman
>>>>> > Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone
>>>>> >
>>>>> > office: 718 285 9394
>>>>> > cell: 917 447 4843
>>>>> > email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
>>>>> > Twitter: @janetreitman
>>>>> > Skype: janetreitman
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>>>> > From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com
>>>>> > <barriticus@gmail.com><
>>>>> barriticus@gmail.com>]
>>>>> > Sent: Fri 4/20/2012 1:28 PM
>>>>> > To: Reitman, Janet
>>>>> > Subject: Re: Barrett here
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Here's the op-ed, might also work as a good summary of what's gone
>>>>> > down,
>>>>> as
>>>>> > opposed to the wiki, which is kind of all over the place.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/20/cyber-misinformation-campaign-against-usa-today
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Reitman, Janet <
>>>>> > Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > ******
>>>>> >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > hey - thanks for getting back to me. Can we talk about the guys in
>>>>> > > Lulzsec? I'm doing a story about them - basically a piece
>>>>> > > chronicling
>>>>> the
>>>>> > > evolution of that part of Anon into a more political/radical
>>>>> > > movement,
>>>>> > with
>>>>> > > a focus on the Lulzsec/Antisec crew - and was hoping you could talk
>>>>> > > to
>>>>> me
>>>>> > > about them, anything you recall, any insights you have (i'm
>>>>> > > essentialy
>>>>> > > trying to profile these people without being able to interview
>>>>> > > them,
>>>>> > which
>>>>> > > i know you can understand is extremely hard...)
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Can we set up a time to talk/skype/chat/etc?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Let me know...
>>>>> > > ps - saw that profile of you in D Mag was nominated for an ASME,
>>>>> > > which
>>>>> is
>>>>> > > a big honor for the writer. Were you happy with the piece?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Janet
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Janet Reitman
>>>>> > > Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > office: 718 285 9394
>>>>> > > cell: 917 447 4843
>>>>> > > email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
>>>>> > > Twitter: @janetreitman
>>>>> > > Skype: janetreitman
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >   This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its
>>>>> > > affiliates.
>>>>> It
>>>>> > > may be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only
>>>>> > > for
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > > use of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy,
>>>>> > > or
>>>>> > > otherwise reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it
>>>>> > > to
>>>>> be
>>>>> > > viewed by any individual not originally listed as a recipient. If
>>>>> > > the
>>>>> > > reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
>>>>> > > hereby
>>>>> > > notified that any unauthorized disclosure, dissemination,
>>>>> > > distribution,
>>>>> > > copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the information
>>>>> herein
>>>>> > > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
>>>>> error,
>>>>> > > please immediately notify the sender and delete this message. Thank
>>>>> you.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > From: Barrett Brown
>>>>> > > [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com<barriticus@gmail.com><
>>>>> barriticus@gmail.com><
>>>>> > barriticus@gmail.com>]
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > Sent: Tue 4/17/2012 9:21 AM
>>>>> > > To: Reitman, Janet
>>>>> > > Subject: Barrett here
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > How can I help you?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > --
>>>>> > > Regards,
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Barrett Brown
>>>>> > > 940-735-9748
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Barrett Brown
>>>>> > 940-735-9748
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Barrett Brown
>>>>> 940-735-9748
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Barrett Brown
>>>> 940-735-9748
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Barrett Brown
>>> 940-735-9748
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Barrett Brown
>> 940-735-9748
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Barrett Brown
> 940-735-9748
>



--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748