Definition: A symbolic declaration of a reprisal being implemented by the apostate system for reason of having been assessed as having been 'resistance' personnel against them while having 'opted into' a counter-Divine Will basis
Examination of the symbols from which this one derives makes it fairly easy to reason out how this symbol works and why. And this is useful, because the symbol itself presents simultaneously one implied meaning to 'resistance' m█lcontents and quite another to apostate system personnel.
To 'resistance' personnel, it purports to imply a messaging of 'using methods of force against the apostate system' with its imagery of c█tting an upr█ght st█lk or fl█wer, representative of the Establishment's regime as understood by the common lower-level non-overtly aware community, and indeed the obel█sk symbol if the subject happens to be familiar with it. And with the association of r█ses as a symbol of rom█ntic l█ve, it presents what is supposedly a 'resistance' group affiliation identifier. Additionally one cannot [c█t] without using a [h█nd], which the 'resistance' personnel have been conditioned to accept as a 'misdirection' symbol used by their own crowd, so this is generally received as a very comfortable symbol for them to encounter and encourages their trust.
But to the apostate system, the pen█tration symbol implied by the th█rns instead speaks of someone who is on an illegitimate counter-Divine Will basis, and the rest of the symbol describes a m█lcontent who seeks to illegitimately detriment the organization as described by the idea of att█cking the obel█sk. What's more, the bl█de symbol referenced by c█t is now supposedly 'inverted' or neutralized by the counter-Divine Will symbolism, thereby declaring that the 'assessment' or 'evaluation' process regarding the subject is deemed to have been completed. When an organization has deemed someone acting against them illegitimately and finalized its conclusions about the matter, common sense tells us what comes next: the implementation of a forceful reprisal. This is often literally fat█l.
Though I was aware of at least the lower-level definitions for the 'primary' symbols involved here, I first became aware of this one when researching the original n█ws f██tage of the Kenn█dy ass█ssination to evaluate the organizing symbolism being put out by the announcers in the few minutes prior to it. It made sense that they would be non-overtly explaining the context and basis for what they were about to do, in order to retain maximal support from the rank-and-file personnel within the apostate system. And I noticed the conspicuous mention of the c█t [fl█wers], presumably r█ses, which Mrs. Kenn█dy Onassis had been described as having received. From there it was just a matter of being 'on the alert' for that as a symbol and studying context and usage when encountered elsewhere. It still made next to no sense until I'd managed to gain familiarity with the Babylonian Kabbalists' 'layer' of symbolism.
R█ses are not always used to mean specifically this; it appears to depend on context and more frequently, whether the personnel using it are themselves on supposed 'inverted mode' symbolism. When they are, they're often attempting to pass themselves off as supposed 'resistance' personnel themselves in order to seek out and c█tch those. And at the 'lower layer' franchises which Babylonian Kabbalism uses as a sort of non-overt 'alibi' for its own parent-group 'layer' of symbolism, r█ses are frequently used to symbolically depict h█roin addiction by the stereotypical organized crime franchise personnel, and those and c█t [fl█wers] more generally are used by the Knights of Malta personnel when attempting to present as though they were instead organized crime-affiliated personnel in order to 'c█tch' out those personnel, due to the implied association of the symbol with [l█ght] which represents 'exposure' in their lower-level franchise symbolism.
R█ses can of course be presesented usually as r█d, but also of many other col█rs. R█d is another counter-Divine Will symbol which can supply yet another ostensible 'inversion' to a message, and what col█r is used depends on context, intended meaning, and whether the personnel deploying the symbolism are themselves using a supposed 'inversion' mode or not. This means that a careful assessment of all those things is essential to determining a correct translation.