*Fraud of the College Scholarship Fraud Prevention Act (TOC)*

Table of Contents


Mega phone

From: Publisher
cc: NAAS Subscribers and Users
Bcc: Domestic and International Affiliates
Reply Contact

Subject: -- Fraud of The College Scholarsip Fraud Prevention Act

Marilee JonesSallie MaeJohn RyanLawrence BurtNACACDallas Martin

*Consent and Indemnification Statement*
Accessing this page constitutes implied consent to all NAAS EAS/N2 Rules. Absolutely no part of this report, either partially or in its entirety, may be used in advertising, selling or for any commercial purpose or downloaded into any computer system for subsequent storage, editing, personal re-prints, or editing, or manipulation of any type. Viewing, reading, or electronically accessing this report by any means constitutes an agreement by viewer with The Companies (as defined per NAAS EAS/N2 Rules) to completely indemnify the same from and against all liability that may arise out of the re-publication and general distribution of this NEWS report. Viewer further agrees to hold The Companies (as defined per NAAS EAS/N2 Rules), the Publisher, and all persons (collectively, jointly, and severally) that have assisted in the investigation, editing, distribution, and publication of this series, harmless from any loss, damage, claim of damage, liability or expense arising out of or resulting from any aspect of this web presentation in general and this specific publication in particular. The viewpoints and fair comment discussed represent the independent opinions of the Publisher, and authors, and do not ---in any way, shape, form or fashion ---- necessarily reflect or represent or are indicative of the viewpoint(s) or opinion of site owner, or any officer, director, or employee of the same. By accessing this report from a general hypertext link, viewer expressly agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the report, fully consents to all NAAS EAS/N2 Rules, and has established that he/she or it (in the case that the Reader is a non-natural person) has an interest in the subject matter expressed and the contents herein. For context of the full legal disclaimer, please see the legal disclaimer and Publisher's notes on the final page.
*Non-reproduction Policy*
Part VIII.
Prostitution of NASFAA and Carnegie Mellon University
In a sign of hypocrisy and possible deceptive advertising, the businessman marketed his business to the general public as "free" and that he was an "objective" reporter. Subsequent investigations and data provided by Jupitor Communications determined that the alleged CMU student was soliciting prospective advertisers for monies, seeking to boost the 'hit' counts of his websites, and that he held an "advisory" position at a for-profit scholarship search service (FastWeb) that was prominently featured on the website of his business.

Moreover, in or about July of 1996, this Publisher had contacted the Dept. of Corporations in Harrisburg, PA, at 1-717-787-1057 to inquire about the registration status of the informant's original corporation. They remarked that "FinAid Page, Inc." is indeed a registered "FOR-PROFIT" corporation.

Using the "exclusive" sponsorship from a prominent non-profit organization as an umbrella of credibility and respect, and to drum up support for his self-enriching theory of "rampant" scholarship-related fraud, the serpentine businessman exhorted financial-aid book publishers, members of NASFAA, members of NACAC, and consumers to take notice of his self-serving statistics, theories, and so-called "scam" guidelines.

In provocative fashion, the suspicious CMU businessman with barely a single year in business, with no experience as a sponsor, administrator, or executive of any scholarship foundation or non-profit financial-aid organization, who failed to provide substantiation of any of his theories and statements, who was allowed to freely prostitute the resources, image, and likeness, of his alma mater:

  1. Created and published a series of "guidelines" and warning signs that he alleged should be considered as evidence of a potential scholarship-related scam;

  2. Marketed and created real-looking "Reliability Reports" that mimicked official Reliability Reports coming from a local Better Business Bureau office, but in fact said reports were not official;

  3. Used the prestige and appearance of a CMU "office address" to receive and place phone calls to the national media, who subsequently quoted and referred millions of readers to his businesses;

  4. Used the NASFAA non-profit logo, NASFAA symbols, NASFAA trade dress on his for-profit website to further lull consumers into accepting his "credibility"

  5. Gained access to the numerous financial aid counselors associated with NASFAA, and a related organization called National Association of College Admissions Counselors (a/k/a/ NACAC), and exhorted these persons to accept his radical political ideology and make-shift guidelines;

  6. Routinely fed unsubstantiated statistics and questionable data to the mainstream media;

  7. Posed as a "Financial Aid Expert" in media stories depite not being registered with the Securities Exchange Commission as a certified "Financial Expert" and not being certified by any U.S. Court as an "expert" in ANY endeavor, much less the specific subject of financial-aid;

  8. Was frequently referred to as a "Financial Aid Expert" or simply "expert" by corrupt and unethical journalists and reporters who coincidentally also covered stories associated with NACAC and/or NASFAA;

  9. ETC;

Part IX.
Attorneys General Report on Suspicious partnerships
Potential for Deception and Deceit
In April of 1999, on the heels of a report by this Publisher, the California Attorney General's (CAG) office published a timely, preliminary, report detailing the illicit, unethical, and dirty relationships that oftentimes exist between non-proft businesses who "partner up" with for-profit businessess. Appropriately, the report was entitled "PUBLIC TRUST, PROFIT AND THE POTENTIAL FOR PUBLIC DECEPTION". What a fitting title. Although the report probably should have been first published in June of 1996, the public nonetheless was thankful that it was ultimately published. The CAG report concludes that:
"the use of partnerships between commercial entities and nonprofit organizations to market commercial products using the names and logos of the nonprofit organizations is a growing trend that raises significant legal and policy concerns. "

At the time, the report was based upon a general consensus of at least 16 Attorneys General from different states and received input from numerous respectable non-profit organizations. Since that time, certainly more persons have opened their eyes to the fact that any time a non-profit organization enters into profit-sharing venture or exlcusive partnership with a for-profit entity, red flags will appear.

Based upon their review to date, the Attorneys General believe that commercial-nonprofit product advertisements often communicate the false and misleading messages that the products have been endorsed by the nonprofit partner in the commercial-nonprofit relationship and that such products are superior to other competing products.

In the case of NASFAA and FinAid Page, Inc., the products appear to be the scholarship search services and student-loan providers listed on the FinAid page, along with the theories featured on the web page. It these recommended student-loan providers that would later become the focus of a wide-ranging investigation into the ethics and integrity of NASFAA, and its members.

Questions for the Reader
Is it just a coincidence that the alleged CMU student was seeking advertising revenue at around the same time that NASFAA agreed to sponsor the page? 'Hits' on web pages translate into advertising dollars.
Is it just a coincidence that NASFAA, an organzation headed by a man called Dallas Martin, allowed FinAid Page, Inc. to display the NASFAA logo on the FinAid Page, Inc. web site?
Is it just a coincidence that so many seemingly respectable media outlets have cited the page in reference material as sponsored by NASFAA?
Is it just a concidence that the universities who choose to provide hyper-links to FinAid Page also have financial-aid counselors/administrators with ties to NASFAA?
Did NASFAA disclose the full extent of its sponsorship of the page, and how much income did NASFAA make, if any?

According to the CAG report, such joint advertising campaigns using a respected nonprofit's name and logo often fail to provide important information consumers need in order to make informed choices, including the facts that the commercial sponsor has paid the nonprofit organization for use of its name and logo and, as is often the case, that the relationship between the corporate sponsor and the nonprofit is exclusive in nature.

Both the commercial sponsor and the nonprofit organization engaged in advertising a commercial product through use of the nonprofit's name or logo must satisfy all applicable legal standards, including compliance with consumer laws prohibiting false advertising, unfair and/or deceptive trade practices and consumer fraud, says the multi-state report authored by the CAG.

Advertisements for commercial products must not misrepresent that the nonprofit organization has endorsed the advertised product. If such an advertisement uses a nonprofit organization's name or logo, and the nonprofit has not in fact endorsed the advertised product, the advertisement must clearly and conspicuously disclose that the nonprofit organization has not endorsed or recommended the product.

In the case of FinAid Page, Inc., and NASFAA, NASFAA stated that it "proudly" endorsed the FinAid Page and did not --- to the best of this Publisher's knowledge and belief --- specifically state that it did not endorse the products and services advertised on the FinAid Page, Inc. website. In this sense, it appears that the public was misled, and publishers such as NEWSWEEK, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, etc, generated millions of new 'HITS' for the FinAid Page web site.

Whether or not NASFAA is a corrupt , illegitimate, or legitimate tax-exempt organization who should have its tax-exempt status revoked is not a question that this Publisher is qualified to answer. That question should be answered by the proper authorities.

Soon after the California report appeared, and after questions arose about the appropriateness of NASFAA's relationship to a controversial web page that some perceived as an endorsement of Marxism, NASFAA officials finally got the message and terminated the sponsorship. However, the damage from misinformation and deceit had already been done.

Part X.
Project $Scholar$Scam Announcement
Student-Loan Industry Ignored by Design
On the heels of the infamous NASFAA and FinAid Page announcement of their suspicious partnership, the FTC soon announced a campaign called $ProjectScholarship Scam. The project was launched by the FTC in September of 1996. Remember, the crime of Identy-theft was raging like wild fires across the entire United States and had the ability to affect literally all Americans. Also, student-loan fraud and mortgage fraud were rampant at the time.

The subject matter of so-called "scholarship-fraud", meanwhile, affected less than 1% of the entire population. Legitimate and actual crimes such as Identity-theft and Mortgage scams were deliberately ignored, and did not receive specific attention until years later.

ProjectScholarship Scam allows the Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Education to enter into "partnerships" with private and public sources that engage in a wide "variety media, including websites,booklets, brochures, publishers, and authors of financial-aid books."

One of the many partnerships was the creation of the NASFAA/FinAid Page cooperative agreement, the use of fabricated titles ("Financial Aid Expert", "Expert" for the alleged CMU student, and the use of corrupt financial-aid book authors who were instructed to deliberately print false, misleading, deceptive, and untrue statements. The tactics were similar to the false pre-war rhetoric leading up to the Iraq war. In this case, no persons were killed but certain sectors of the financial-aid industry were smeared by design.

Many of these "partnerships" were outright fraudulent and deprived students and parents of honest information, and essentially steered these students to fraudulent student-loan companies that were members of NASFAA and/or NACAC. Instead of respecting federal laws and sticking to verifiable facts, parrots, pigeons, and mules were used as "journalistic" sources without disclosing their commissions, without disclosing their sources of information, without writing a balanced viewpoint, and without disclosing the details and their arrangement or benefits as a "partner" to the federal government.

If one were to look at the writings of, say, Dr. Cheri Westmoreland, Samuel Freidman, Shannon Turlington, or certain members of NACAC, and compare their statements to actual facts one could get the impression that these authors or writers were not indepenent professionals but merely parrots or pigeons. It is a known fact that a substantial number of financial-aid book authors and members of NACAC and NASFAA were recruited as part of Project $Scholar$Scam.

In virtually all cases, the recuited authors, writers, and reporters, used rigged news content, omitted material facts regarding secretive financial arrangments amongst NASFAA members, and implied it is illegal to assess fees for merit services rendered.

Companies that went so far as "charging more than a postage stamp" for services rendered or that departed even 1 millimeter from the self-created Marxist criteria developed by the partner of NASFAA and his associated array of parrots, pigeons, and journalistic whores, were immediately targeted, and placed under the "possible prosecution" category.

The alleged CMU student discreetly convinced various government officials and affiliates of his sponsor to re-write financial-aid books and re-fashion them such that they contained snippets of his political theories. Using his sponsorship by NASFAA, it was relatively easy to recruit other figures, which in turn allowed this snake to place his theories alongside locations of published financial-aid books.

For example, consider the suspicious cast of characters who appear as financial-aid administrators in the How to Pay for College Book by SalleMae, and Gen & Kelly Tanabe. Virtually all of the characters who praised the book are associated with NASFAA, and/or NACAC. Years would pass before the N.Y. Attorney General and others would catch up to the scheming ways of Sallae Mae.

According to statistics from the Federal Trade Commission, the percentage of scholarship-related complaints versus total fraud complaints have ranged from 0.25 (1993-1995) to 0.19 in year 2003. For those persons not adept at statistics, put another way, fraud OUTSIDE of scholarship-related areas constituted a hefty 99.81%. A majority of this high percentage contains complaints for Identity-theft.

To date, it is important to note that not a single person has been convicted specifically under the The College Scholarship Fraud Prevention Act. Nor has a single one of the alleged 900 to 1,000 "scholarship scams" alleged to be in existence ever been prosecuted under the personal theories developed and published by the federal informants and their parrots. None of the most sensational statistics of the alleged CMU student have yet to be independently verified.

U.S. Dept. of Justice files confirm that the wide-ranging campaign of national deceit that Project$Scholar$scam utilzed reached its zenith when NASFAA entered into the special financial arrangement with the CMU government-connected informant and agreed to serve as the "exclusive sponsor" of his for-profit financial-aid business.

Years after its passage, scores of NASFAA and NACAC members have been implicated in various financial-aid crimes and student-loan schemes that vary across the board. The common thread is that the NASFAA and/or NACAC member takes advantage of naive students while profitting handsomely from other NACAC/NASFAA at the expense of both student and parent.

Since many NASFAA and NACAC members helped craft the The College Scholarship Fraud Prevention Act, it should be no surprise to even the dumbest idiot in Congress that voted for the Act that not a single provision applies to the sort of schemes now being investigated by the New York Attorney General.

Part XI.
Use of False and Unsubstantiated Statements Fuel Desire for Federal legislation.
The tactics used by the informant were consistent with dishonesty, mispresentation, and the pre-war rhetoric used to justify the Iraq war. According to confimred deaths by the U.S Department of Defense, ovr 3700 Americans have been confirmed killed in Iraq, as of September 1st, 2007. Over 110 persons have committed suicide.

After thousands of American deaths, injuries, murders, court-martials, maimed bodies, false and misleading news articles by corrupt print journalists, political pundits from both major political parties, and a general consensus of Americans --- as expressed through polls --- now firmly believe that the country America invaded did not have the weapons of mass destruction as reported, and that the country did not pose a credible threat to Americans.

Like a Nazi field marshall peering over the balcony to the German masses, the self-serving NASFAA partner, and CMU undergrad used his artificial university office to seek attention to himself. While under the suspicious sponsorship of NASFAA, he used his Carnegie Mellon University Wean-Hall "office" to deliver a series of political announcements, to promote his own self-serving theories, and alleged alarming statistics on the purported trend and expansive nature of "scholarship-related" fraud.

The carefully scripted remarkes were instrumental in diverting attention away from rampant student-loan fraud, and the undisclosed relationships that existed between his chief sponsor and their financial-backers.

Let's consider these facts:

  1. In September of 1996, for example, the Associated Press quoted the informant by name as saying that an "Estimated 300,000 students and parents fall victim to 100 to 200 fraudulent scholarship-search services" The article was repeated through out major metropolitan newspapers. Not a single element of the speech addressed Identity-theft despite then police statitics evidencing the rise of such crimes;

  2. In September of 1996, for example, the Los Angeles times reported another fanciful boast by the informant/CMU businessman in which he claimed: "Every year, several hundred thousand students and parents are defrauded by scholarship scams. The victims of these scams lose $100 million dollars annually." The article was repeated through out major metropolitan newspapers. Not a single element of the speech addressed Identity-theft despite then police statitics evidencing the rise of such crimes;

  3. While promoting his Hammer & Sickle views before the U.S. Senate, for example, the CMU businessman and alleged student wildly claimed that "there are 900 to 1,000 scholarship scams of all types still in operation, with new scams being created every year." The speech was referenced through out major metropolitan newspapers. Not a single element of the speech addressed Identity-theft despite then police statistics evidencing the rise of such crimes.

Despite its prestigious position as the nation's premier organzation of financial-aid officeres that boasts many of the most prestigious colleges and unversities, banks, and institutions, NASFAA not only shared a bed with a Marxist-sounding federal informant, it glowingly remarked that it was the "proud" sponsor of The Financial Aid Information Page. Whether it was "proud" because of a potentially lucrative business deal that sought to spin the spotlight away from its own practices and apparent non-disclosed financial arrangements, or was NASFAA "proud" to sponsor the socialist theories of an attention-seeking, arrogant, immature, tale-spinning, self-consuming, and poorly educated Carnegie Mellon University student is a question for readers of this report.

What is not a question mark is the conduct of NASFAA, and its controversial and long-standing President, Dallas Martin. The N.Y. Attorney General infact sent NASFAA a letter in early 2007 in which it assailed the practices of NASFAA, and its members.

As if to cement its ties or preempt questions about the credibility and legitimacy of its sponsorship of a for-profit financial-aid web page, and its association with a person who publicly hawks Marxist theories, NASFAA allowed the alleged CMU student to use its non-profit logo on his business website for marketing material, and subsequently awarded the alleged student something called the "Meritorious Achievement Award" in 1996. According to NASFAA, the " award is presented to an individual who has made an important contribution to the Association or to the profession that the Association wishes to recognize." It is unclear to this Publisher what type of other persons received this "award" and whether or not other past recipients also shared the same political beliefs of the federal informant.

Part XII.
Marxist and Deceptive Speech before the U.S. Senate
¶ While under the sponsorship of NASFAA, the alleged CMU student boldly posted false, cheaply written, poorly-researched, look-a-like, so-called "Reliability Reports" on several businesses and persons, some of whom threatened him with legal action. The suspicious and fabricated "Reliability Reports" attacked legitimate capitalistic business practices, recklessly attacked California and Nevada-based businesses for no subtantiated reasons, while featring a preferred list of advertisers of student loan companies and preferred scholarship search service companies.

The Financial-Aid Informantion Page was certainly a form of advertising, and it omitted disclosures. Leading up to debate about the passage of the Act, the webiste conspicuously omitted references to:
  1. Fraud by financial aid consultants;
  2. Fraud by financial aid administrators employed at institutions that were also members of NASFAA;
  3. Fraud by financial aid administrators and college counselors that are members of National Association for College Admission Counseling (a/k/a/ NACAC) an organization related to NASFAA; ;
  4. Fraud by financial aid seminar leaders;
  5. FAFSA/Student-loan fraud;
  6. Fraud by financial aid book publishers;
  7. Fraud and deception by the makers and publishers of standardized tests;
  8. Fraud by college/university financial aid administrators colluding with parents and their respective sons and daughters.

¶ Using his internal connections with NASFAA, and his associations with several federal law-enforcement agencies, the Hebrew-speaking, alleged CMU student (instead of Dallas Martin, the President of NASFAA) was allowed to give a speech before the U.S. Senate in furtherance of his effort to get the Act passed. In what should have been a respectable speech before the U.S. Senate about purported incidents of financial-aid fraud and its effects on students, the alleged CMU student startled the audience and instead gave a speech that would have surely made Karl Marx very proud.

The NASFAA partner trumpted his Socialist themes as if the country he were speaking in was the United Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) instead of the U.S.A. Communist rhetoric was heard. The brash informant even proposed that his Communist-sounding website be linked to the FTCina further effort to legitimize his political theories. Also discussed was typical NAZI stuff: curtailment of civil liberties; prohibit merit-based processing fees, and burden legitimate practices with additional federal legislation.

Virtually every possible competitor (real or imagined) to the SAT industry and student-loan providers were generaly attacked.

Like obedient puppets on a string, many NACAC members with latent or suppreseed urges to support Marxist thought, applauded the informant and quotes verbatim his theories on an NACAC e-list serve.

Given this decidely Red atmosphere, surely something was omitted from the speech by the NASFAA partner. The Red Puppet, as he was known in some European government circles, conveniently omitted, amongst others things:
  1. References and case studies about fraud by financial aid consultants;
  2. References and case studies about fraud by financial aid administrators;
  3. References and case studies about fraud by persons conducting financial aid seminars;
  4. References and case studies about fraud by tax-preparers;
  5. References and case studies about fraud by student-loan providers;
  6. References and case studies about fraud by financial aid book publishers;
  7. References and case studies about fraud by college/university financial aid administrators and directors colluding with parents and their respective sons and daughters.
  8. Illicit partnerships between tax-exempt groups and financial aid consumer advocates;
  9. Fraud and deception in the making, marketing, and promotion of standardized tests and its role and influence in the financial aid process;
  10. The fact that he was hustling for advertising dollars while publicly claiming to be for "free" and "objective"
  11. Statistics, documents, and evidence that substantiated his claims;
  12. etc.

¶ Instead of focusing upon actual fraud, the informant focused on perceived fraud, or legal business practices that violated his self-created der Fuhrer ways of conducting business. He used fabricated, phony, and omitted statments a carrot to lure and out-smart legislators.

Part XIII.
NASFAA Terminates Constroversial Partnership
¶ After questions concerning the appropriateness of a business relationship between a non-profit organization with a for-profit entity were raised, and after an investigation revealed that the so-called "free" and "objective" FinAid Page was really hustling for advertising dollars on the sly, and after California Attorney General BILL LOCKYER's office put out a public report called "PUBLIC TRUST, PROFIT AND THE POTENTIAL FOR PUBLIC DECEPTION" that targeted the "use of partnerships between commercial entities and nonprofit organizations to market commercial products using the names and logos of the nonprofit organizations....", NASFAA finally terminated its sponsorship of the FinAid Page. However, public perception remained that something was not quite right.

¶ Evidenced soon surfaced that NASFAA maybe associated with a highly suspicious and new organization called "National Scholarship Providers Association", an organization which has been linked to the same alleged student that enjoyed pecuniary gain from his relationship with NASFAA. NSPA was reputedly funded by one or several current members of NASFAA. Numerous suspicions abound about the intent and purpose of NSPA, and whether or not it is a mere puppet organization whose long terms goals are to press U.S. legislators to implement radical and extremist regulatory views that disfavor students and protect persons and organizations linked to suspicious non-profit, tax-exempt groups.

Part XIV.
Convenient Omissions of U.S.Senate Bill S1455
Protection of NASFAA/NACAC members
Despite the fact that the two groups (NASFAA, and NACAC) colleectively represent over 80% of all admission counselors, guidance counselors, and college institutions in America,and the fact that statistics from the Department of Justice report that crime committed by employed financial-aid counselors is the primary means in which financial-aid crimes are committed or initiated, does it not seem odd that Senate Bill S1455 did not bother to address such key facts?

Specifically, how is it possible to discuss or pass a federal law aimed at purported financial-aid fraud that does not incorporate financial-aid counselors or student loans? It is not surprising that the main proponents of the Act were members of, and persons assocated with NASFAA, NACAC, the SAT cottage industry, and the $85 billion dollar student-loan industry. After-all, sky-high tuitions have benefitted these groups, along with outrageous fees earned from student loans.

Given the fact that both NASFAA and NACAC boast political connections to the U.S. Congress, and the prosecutorial agencies that normally prosecute acts of financial-aid fraud, it is also no coincidence that neither the proposed U.S. Senate Bill S1455 or the actual College Scholarship Fraud Prevention Act addresed any of the issues above, or the illicit financial arrangements and unethical liasons between financial-aid counselors, admissions' counselors and student loan providers.

Instead, what are NACAC and NASFAA members trained to look for --certainly not corrupt financial-aid counselors that have unethical relationships with student loan providers? NACAC have their sights on the little guy; the organizations charging $5 or $10 for a merit-based award, or charging a mere $1 handling fee. The evidence is self-apparent that honest, ethical, and legitimate organizations that assess legitimate processing fees or administrative fees (the same sort of fees assessed by The College board, a prominent member of NASFAA) are excoriated on e-lists operated by NACAC. NACAC members that steal from students or their parents, or who steer students to high-coast loan providers are praised by their colleagues, and were never meant to be targeted by U.S. Senate Bill S1455.

Part XV.
NACAC Members Parrot Socialist Ideology
Despite disturbing questions abput his background, qualifications, and experience, and integrity, the federal informant had no problem in gaining the trust and admiration of many NACAC members. They would probably drink hus saliva if requested to do so. He has had no problem in finding willing guidance counselors, teachers,and other members of NACAC to quote his Socialist theories.

A substantial platform and arena of distribution of his ideas has been an e-list serve associated with NACAC. NACAC has an electronic list-serve which mirrors an electronic chat center. Teachers, educators, and guidance counselors, and other members of NACAC, use the list-serve on many occasions to promote the ideology of the informant associated with NASFAA. ¶ NASFAA is also closely associated with NACAC. The link between the alleged student and NACAC is that the NACAC electronic list-serve serves as squawk box whereby members of NACAC repeat, paraphrase, quote, and worship the political words of the alleged CMU student.

Influential members of NACAC and NASFAA were used to discredit routine, widely accepted, perfectly legitimate business practices associated with merit-based award sponsors, and scholarship search services. Their apparent goal was to target the routine practice of assessing processing fees for merit-based competition in general and to assail the policies of specific organizations in particular. Hundreds of seemingly legitimate businesses were attacked for no other reason than simply charging a fee for processing of merit-based award.

The practices of assessing processing fees for merit-based awards has been affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. What no court has, however, backed, is the deceitful practice of omittig material information to clients while pocketing undisclosed commissions.

Corrupt financial-aid book authors, print journalists, and various member institutions of NACAC, and NASFAA, and many others connected to these two organizations, have either been active participants to the scheme or at least assisted in some way, form, or fashion.

Like willing and unethical hypocrites, none of these NACAC members sought to investigate the apparently false credentials or eating habits of their overweight colleague Marilee Jones, or to disclose what they must have known: Fraud in the student-loans and amongst NASFAA/NACAC members is far more common than these organizations are willing to publicize.

Organizations such as NAAS that choose to print facts and details, and that disclose the names and identities of parrots and pigeons, are smeared and targeted by corrupt newspaper reporters with ties to targets of NAAS Media Reports.

It should also be noted that evidence during the magistrate process and pre-sentencing phase of convicted spy Robert Phillip Hanssen confirmed that several of the colleagues of Hanssen were also instrumental in recruiting the same federal informant who would later be associated with NASFAA. Mr. Hanssen resided not far from the offices of NACAC, and he waa known to be soft with respect to American virtues while deferring to his latent Socialist passions.

Unfortunately, dishonest financial-aid admissions' officers, guidance counselors, and consultants, and loan companies that are associated with and/or members of certain prominent non-profit organizations have honed their skills to be in tune with the common types of fraud. They have combined their student lists to take advantage of the purses and wallets of students and their parents.

While lambasting merit-based scholarship sponsors that assess processing and/or handlings fees as small as $5.00, and while cajoling federal agencies to target companies that even assess a mere $1 handling fee, student loan companies and the politically connected non-profit organizations they are members of have fleeced students and parents out of thoudands of dollars and have overcharged these students for simple student-loans.

Next page: 5 of 5 (Part XVI)
Issues Not Prominently Discussed or Debated by NACAC members