There are no words to accurately described what happened with 40 laps to go in the Daytona 500. During a run-of-the-mill caution, Juan Pablo Montoya was cruising around the track, trying to catch up to the pack. He was having car issues, though, and near the end of the back-stretch his car broke.

That alone might be bad enough, but his car happened to give way, causing him to lose control, right around the spot NASCAR officials were blowing off the track with jet dryers. These are filled with jet fuel. This is what happened next:

Oh, and it certainly got worse.

After a few moments of “WHOA,” crews converged on the now-raging fire.

You can see what kind of damage this has caused. At present, just about every fire and emergency crew vehicle is gathered around the spot of the collision. Officials are examining the track in an effort to see if it can be repaired — a jet fuel fire burns very hot, and melts anything around it.

We don’t yet know if the race will be resumed. The track is still being inspected and, well, it doesn’t look good. Back with more as we know it.

Related: Video of the crash.

1. Via BNO News Wire Service:
2. www.bnonews.com
3. WIKILEAKS PRESS RELEASE
4. EMBARGOED EMBARGOED EMBARGOED
5. DO NOT DISCLOSE THE EXISTANCE OF THIS RELEASE
6. OR ANY INFORMATION DERIVED FROM IT BEFORE
7. Monday 27 February 00:01 GMT 2012
8. The Global Intelligence Files
9. http://wikileaks.org/gifiles
10. Twitter tag: #gifiles
11. OFFICAL PRESS CONFERENCE 12 hours after EMBARGO ENDS:
12.     Monday 27 Feburary, noon, Frontline Club, 13 Norfolk Place, Paddington,
13. London, W2 1QJ.
14. LONDON–Today WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files – more than five million emails from the Texas-headquartered “global intelligence” company Stratfor. The emails date from between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defense Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment-laundering techniques and psychological methods, for example:
15. “[Y]ou have to take control of him. Control means financial, sexual or psychological control… This is intended to start our conversation on your next phase” – CEO George Friedman to Stratfor analyst Reva Bhalla on 6 December 2011, on how to exploit an Israeli intelligence informant providing information on the medical condition of the President of Venezuala, Hugo Chavez.
16. The material contains privileged information about the US government’s attacks against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and Stratfor’s own attempts to subvert WikiLeaks. There are more than 4,000 emails mentioning WikiLeaks or Julian Assange. The emails also expose the revolving door that operates in private intelligence companies in the United States. Government and diplomatic sources from around the world give Stratfor advance knowledge of global politics and events in exchange for money. The Global Intelligence Files exposes how Stratfor has recruited a global network of informants who are paid via Swiss banks accounts and pre-paid credit cards. Stratfor has a mix of covert and overt informants, which includes government employees, embassy staff and journalists around the world.
17. The material shows how a private intelligence agency works, and how they target individuals for their corporate and government clients. For example, Stratfor monitored and analysed the online activities of Bhopal activists, including the “Yes Men”, for the US chemical giant Dow Chemical. The activists seek redress for the 1984 Dow Chemical/Union Carbide gas disaster in Bhopal, India. The disaster led to thousands of deaths, injuries in more than half a million people, and lasting environmental damage.
18. Stratfor has realised that its routine use of secret cash bribes to get information from insiders is risky. In August 2011, Stratfor CEO George Friedman confidentially told his employees: “We are retaining a law firm to create a policy for Stratfor on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. I don’t plan to do the perp walk and I don’t want anyone here doing it either.”
19. Stratfor’s use of insiders for intelligence soon turned into a money-making scheme of questionable legality. The emails show that in 2009 then-Goldman Sachs Managing Director Shea Morenz and  Stratfor CEO George Friedman hatched an idea to “utilise the intelligence” it was pulling in from its insider network to start up a captive strategic investment fund. CEO George Friedman explained in a confidential August 2011 document, marked DO NOT SHARE OR DISCUSS: “What StratCap will do is use our Stratfor’s intelligence and analysis to trade in a range of geopolitical  instruments, particularly government bonds, currencies and the like”.  The emails show that in 2011 Goldman Sach’s Morenz invested “substantially” more than $4million and joined Stratfor’s board of directors. Throughout 2011, a complex offshore share structure extending as far as South Africa was erected, designed to make StratCap appear to be legally independent. But, confidentially, Friedman told StratFor staff: “Do not think of StratCap as an outside organisation. It will be integral… It will be useful to you if, for the sake of convenience, you think of it as another aspect of Stratfor and Shea as another executive in Stratfor… we are already working on mock portfolios and trades”. StratCap is due to launch in 2012.
20. The Stratfor emails reveal a company that cultivates close ties with US government agencies and employs former US government staff. It is preparing the 3-year Forecast for the Commandant of the US Marine Corps, and it trains US marines and “other government intelligence agencies” in “becoming government Stratfors”. Stratfor’s Vice-President for Intelligence, Fred Burton, was formerly a special agent with the US State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service and was their Deputy Chief of the counterterrorism division. Despite the governmental ties, Stratfor and similar companies operate in complete secrecy with no political oversight or accountability.  Stratfor claims that it operates “without ideology, agenda or national bias”, yet the emails reveal private intelligence staff who align themselves closely with US government policies and channel tips to the Mossad – including through an information mule in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Yossi Melman, who conspired with Guardian journalist David Leigh to secretly, and in violation of WikiLeaks’ contract with the Guardian, move WikiLeaks US diplomatic cables to Israel.
21. Ironically, considering the present circumstances, Stratfor was trying to get into what it called the leak-focused “gravy train” that sprung up after WikiLeaks’ Afghanistan disclosures:
22.         “[Is it] possible for us to get some of that ‘leak-focused’ gravy train? This is an obvious fear sale, so that’s a good thing. And we have something to offer that the IT security companies don’t, mainly our focus on counter-intelligence and surveillance that Fred and Stick know better than anyone on the planet… Could we develop some ideas and procedures on the idea of ´leak-focused’ network security that focuses on preventing one’s own employees from leaking sensitive information…  In fact, I’m not so sure this is an IT problem that requires an IT solution.”
23. Like WikiLeaks’ diplomatic cables, much of the significance of the emails will be revealed over the coming weeks, as our coalition and the public search through them and discover connections. Readers will find that whereas large numbers of Stratfor’s subscribers and clients work in the US military and intelligence agencies, Stratfor gave a complimentary membership to the controversial Pakistan general Hamid Gul, former head of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service, who, according to US diplomatic cables, planned an IED attack on international forces in Afghanistan in 2006. Readers will discover Stratfor’s internal email classification system that codes correspondence according to categories such as ‘alpha’, ‘tactical’ and ‘secure’. The correspondence also contains code names for people of particular interest such as ‘Izzies’ (members of Hezbollah), or ‘Adogg’ (Mahmoud Ahmedinejad).
24. Stratfor did secret deals with dozens of media organisations and journalists – from Reuters to the Kiev Post. The list of Stratfor’s “Confederation Partners”, whom Stratfor internally referred to as its “Confed Fuck House” are included in the release. While it is acceptable for journalists to swap information or be paid by other media  organisations, because Stratfor is a private intelligence organisation that services governments and  private clients these relationships are corrupt or corrupting.
25. WikiLeaks has also obtained Stratfor’s list of informants and, in many cases, records of its payoffs, including $1,200 a month paid to the informant  “Geronimo” , handled by Stratfor’s Former State Department agent Fred  Burton.
26. WikiLeaks has built an investigative partnership with more than 25 media organisations and activists to inform the public about this huge body of documents. The organisations were provided access to a sophisticated investigative database developed by WikiLeaks and together with WikiLeaks are conducting journalistic evaluations of these emails. Important revelations discovered using this system will appear in the media in the coming weeks, together with the gradual release of the source documents.
27. Public partners in the investigation:
28. More than 25 media partners (others will be disclosed after their first publication):
29. Al Akhbar – Lebanon – http://english.al-akhbar.com
30. Al Masry Al Youm – Egypt – http://www.almasry-alyoum.com
31. Bivol – Bulgaria – http://bivol.bg
32. CIPER – Chile – http://ciperchile.cl
33. Dawn Media – Pakistan – http://www.dawn.com
34. L’Espresso – Italy – http://espresso.repubblica.it
35. La Repubblica – Italy – http://www.repubblica.it
36. La Jornada – Mexico – www.jornada.unam.mx/
37. La Nacion – Costa Rica – http://www.nacion.com
38. Malaysia Today – Malaysia – www.malaysia-today.net
39. McClatchy – United States – http://www.mcclatchy.com
40. Nawaat – Tunisia – http://nawaat.org
41. NDR/ARD – Germany – http://www.ard.de
42. Owni – France – http://owni.fr
43. Pagina 12 – Argentina – www.pagina12.com.ar
44. Plaza Publica – Guatemala – http://plazapublica.com.gt
45. Publico.es – Spain – www.publico.es
46. Rolling Stone – United States – http://www.rollingstone.com
47. Russia Reporter – Russia – http://rusrep.ru
48. Ta Nea – Greece –- http://www.tanea.gr
49. Taraf – Turkey – http://www.taraf.com.tr
50. The Hindu – India – www.thehindu.com
51. The Yes Men – Bhopal Activists – Global http://theyesmen.org
52. Nicky Hager for NZ Herald – New Zealand – http://www.nzherald.co.nz

Source

Euro jumps on news of Greek aid package – @MarketWatch

• Submitted 18 mins ago by editor
• via BreakingNews.com

Eurozone finance ministers reach deal on Greek package; Financing to total 130 billion Euros – Reuters via @CNBC

• Submitted Feb. 21, 2012, 3:05 a.m. GMT by editor
• via BreakingNews.com

Remarks recently delivered by a senior enforcement official at the Securities and Exchange Commission suggest that securities regulators are now looking to expand their definition of what constitutes insider trading and others types of securities fraud, the FOX Business Network has learned.

The remarks were made by David Rosenfeld, associate regional director and co-head of enforcement in the SEC’s New York office, at a conference earlier this month. The comments have the legal advisers at big Wall Street firms and hedge funds scrambling to determine if their clients have been routinely violating insider trading laws as well as Regulation FD, which prohibits companies from selectively disclosing corporate information to only a handful of market participants, according to three partners at major law firms who were in attendance.

“Based on what he said it seems like the SEC is expanding the definition of insider trading and other violations,” said a senior partner at a major law firm who requested anonymity because he has cases before the commission.

SEC spokesman Jon Nester said some of Rosenfeld’s remarks have been taken out of context.

“He was basically telling people to be careful,” Nester said.

But many of the attendees interviewed by the FOX Business Network disagree, saying Rosenfeld was interpreting routine communications between investors, analysts and corporate officials as illegal because inside information could be disclosed.

“David was frankly shocked that  some of this stuff was going on, which in turn shocked me,” said another attendee who is a partner at a major law firm. “You talk to your institutional investors as a regular course of business, and I can tell you from talking to people at the SEC, David is not alone at the commission holding these views.”

Rosenfeld’s remarks carry weight because his office brought one of the most high-profile insider trading cases in recent history by charging former Galleon Group chief Raj Rajaratnam with violating civil insider trading laws. In addition to the SEC’s civil case, Rajaratnam was convicted of criminal insider trading charges and has been sentenced to a lengthy prison term.

Rosenfeld made his comments at a Feb 2 conference sponsored by the Directors Roundtable Institute, titled “A New Era of Federal Prosecutions: Challenges for Main Street and Wall Street.” He appeared on the panel with five top Wall Street attorneys to discuss the current crackdown on insider trading and how regulators are broadly enforcing other securities laws. About 300 people attended, many of them senior partners at major law firms, or senior legal officials at big banks.

Rosenfeld first raised eyebrows with remarks involving how companies disclose information to investors and analysts, said one person who was in attendance. This person said Rosenfeld said he was “surprised” that Wall Street analysts and companies they cover have private conversations after earnings calls, where corporations broadly distribute their quarterly results.

Rosenfeld indicated that these private communications could violate Regulation FD, this person said, even though analysts routinely call corporate executives to get additional color and clarification on earnings; such practices have been considered legal in the past, legal experts say.

In addition, Rosenfeld called “troubling” other activities that are commonplace in the securities business, such as one-on-one meetings between analysts and corporate officials during so-called “analyst days” where companies discuss corporate issues with analysts and investors. Rosenfeld said these meetings could also violate rule FD and insider trading laws, according to another person who was in attendance.

Another controversial aspect of Rosenfeld’s remarks came during a discussion involving so-called expert networks, which provide hedge funds and other large investors with industry-specific information and data.

Expert networks — which employ corporate executive with detailed knowledge of companies and industries such as health care and technology –have been the target of the current insider trading crackdown for allegedly providing material, non-public information to their hedge fund clients.

Rosenfeld suggested that no corporate executive should ever work with an expert network even though these outfits have long provided broad industry insight and other data that don’t violate securities laws, said one of the attendees.

“Rosenfeld said the government’s view is that no employees should be talking to expert networks even though hedge funds and public firms have been using expert networks legally for years,” said the attendee said.

Nester said in terms of the expert networks, Rosenfeld was suggesting that “he couldn’t see why corporate executives would want to talk to these networks.” As for the other issues, Rosenfeld was pointing out how Rule FD violations might occur through one-on-one meetings, not making a blanket statement that they are in of themselves problematic, Nester said.

Columbia law school professor John Coffee said that the SEC may be simply showing “an excessive level of suspiciousness.”

“I think Rosenfeld is saying that we are nervous about what companies are telling analysts when analysts make calls directly to the company after earnings calls,” Coffee said. “But it’s unrealistic to say that stuff is surprising because of the obvious need to get more information and clarification.”