Introduction
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 .
7 | P a g e