Public Figures and their Relationship with Donald Marshall as REM Driven Clones

Volume 1: March 25th 2012 to May 24th 2012

This document reinforces Mr. Donald Marshall’s testimonies regarding the Illuminati’s highly advanced and hidden technologies; the reality of human cloning; and the reality of REM driven, human cloning. It also intensifies Mr. Marshall’s affirmations regarding the Illuminati’s REM driven human cloning subculture, for the simple reason that many high profile, public figures, are mentioned in this document, for which Mr. Marshall has made very serious and reputation damaging declarations against their names; yet not ONE person mentioned in this document denies ANY of Mr. Marshall’s affirmations; provides evidence to the contrary of Mr. Marshall’s affirmations; OR takes Mr. Marshall to court for making such serious and reputation damaging declarations against their names.

It is against the law to: slander names; fabricate false and reputation damaging allegations; use the image of high-profile figures inappropriately; incite a public panic, as well as, use a computer to do any of the above (Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) 1998 section 43B; Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act (ERRA) 2013 section 17; The Serious Crime Act 2015 section 41 3ZA, Computer Misuse Act (1990) Section 3A). In their silence, the high-profile public figures mentioned in this document, admit their guilt.

Accordingly, when we consider past examples of false allegations claims, what is demonstrated in cases involving high profile figures, follows a pattern whereby the high profile figures either: publicly deny the claims, and do not let it continue, because the claims are reputation damaging; the high profile person(s) takes the accuser to court, whereby the allegations are found to be false, and the accuser is either fined or imprisoned for her / his role in making reputation damaging accusations against the high profile figure; the accuser drops the charges before it reaches a court hearing –because the accuser does not want to implicate themselves further, because their allegations were false to begin with; the high profile person provides evidence to the contrary of the accuser’s allegations –such as submitting to an independent lie detector test; and, in examples where high profile figures have been falsely accused of fathering a child, the high profile person in question has submitted evidence to the contrary such as a DNA / paternity test, which demonstrates CLEARLY that the child does not belong to them.

Furthermore, in an example which may seem innocent on the surface, such as using a high-profile person’s image to deter people from unacceptable workplace behaviour (The Info Stride 2015; TMZ 2015), can lead to slander charges, because, public figures depend on maintaining an image which they sell to the public, -directly, as well as, indirectly. The reader should review the following sources cited here, which give excellent examples regarding how false allegation claims concerning high profile figures have transpired (Huffington Post 2011; The Richest 2014); what the final verdict was; and what happens to the accuser of false allegations.

The message is CLEAR: Mr. Marshall’s accounts are factual; or else, Mr. Marshall would have been subjected to similar treatment as the people who either made false allegations against high-profile people, or used “the image(s)” of high-profile persons inappropriately.