Despite quite a lot of manifest “static” and a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis from the apostate system, it would at least appear that they’ve gotten an ‘erroneous positive’ in their assessment of My position. As usual, overt clarity seems likely to be able to contribute to a resolution to the situation.
The interaction happened this afternoon, and was so tangential a misinterpretation it made sense to allow the apostate system the opportunity to dismiss it internally. When that didn’t happen and ‘N█wsh█ur’s’ presentation seemed to have been altered between the ‘early version’ and the ‘later version’ to make what appear to be allusions to the interaction, clarity then seemed appropriate.
The interaction was over social media, with a literal friend who manifestly appears to self-identify with the ‘organized crime’ franchise of the apostate system. I’ve made quite a number of overt replies to their posts before, and at least once they’ve seemed to have non-overtly depicted an interest towards ‘catching Me out’ in some misbehavior. I’d had to clarify for them as best I could that that wasn’t ‘where I was coming from’. Today they’d posted something approving of some minor overt hypocrisy, and so as usual I’d responded purely with the intention of showing them that hypocrisy as part of an overt effort to mentor them into acquiring better standards.
The overt subject matter of their post could, if desired, be non-overtly interpreted as a reference to an old mutual ‘friend’ of ours via a nickname they’d used. As such My response could as well, and it was in the course of applying reasonable standards of behavior and symbolism avoidance that I carefully worded My response to avoid using the word. I then went back and edited My comment to reword it even more generically, so that it avoided both a reference to that and to any conventional symbolism as well. Despite that, they commented back with an odd, brief statement with counter-Divine Will symbolism that appeared to imply that they’d ‘caught Me out’ using non-overt symbolism.
I commented back immediately in an effort to use basic logic and reasoning to show them how spurious that apparent conclusion was, but soon noticed how untenable it was to attempt to convey an idea clarifying something that had been presented to Me on a non-overt basis while striving to avoid communicating on a non-overt basis Myself.
I decided to allow the apostate system the opportunity to dismiss the inference themselves on its own lack of merits if they would, and clarify overtly here if they manifestly had not. What My literal friend thought I would have been organizing non-overtly by making a supposed non-overt reference to a mutual ‘friend’ whose acquaintance I no longer keep [due to a lapse of standards on his part] is beyond Me.
I think all involved likely had good intentions here. All the non-overt media emphasis on the situation appears likely to have gotten rank-and-file personnel thinking, and thus interpreting, on the context the apostate system has supplied. Then again, trust is commensurate with a Divine Will and True Nature-aligned basis, and the apostate system and those self-identifying with it manifestly haven’t been Choosing to interact on a Divine Will and True Nature-aligned basis, so I’m left with no means of confirming that.
This whole apparent ‘investigation’ appears non-credible for want of that basis, however I’m supplying clarity precisely because there’s no means on My part of confirming on what basis the apostate rank-and-file genuinely consider themselves to be operating [beyond a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis that is].
I should probably also illustrate that when I began these communiqués, I applied My Divine Will-derived sovereignty to establishing the cause of action [the manifestly counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis of the apostate system] and the venue of law to be used [Divine Will principles, augmented by common law maxims and procedure]. Instead we now apparently find the cause of action unremedied for years and what appears to be a new cause of action [an evaluation of Myself] pursued on an ‘inquisitorial’ basis more familiar to Rome and Babylon. In an inquisitorial trial, the state brings a cause of action. The ‘defendant’ is questioned. Witnesses are questioned. The objective of the state is to reach the conclusion it already had in mind. That would appear to be the very definition of a figurative ‘kangaroo court’, and the manifest basis of the apostate system in using what appears to be an ‘inquisitorial’ approach would seem to be fiat motivated by incalcitrance. For its part, ‘incalcitrance’ would seem to reduce to ‘disrespect’, which is a derivative of a counter-True Nature, counter-Divine Will position since respect to appropriate authority is a natural quality of both our True Nature and the Divine Will which confers it. So this appears manifestly to be a non-credible investment of effort for ‘subr█ption’, to transition from My cause of action to quite another like this. I notice that Rome continues to keep strict laws against ‘subr█ption’, and so it’s always manifestly disappointing to see them continuing to use it against others. Their True Nature is better than that.
As for how an ‘investigation’ would be enacted on a fair and impartial basis from personnel who manifestly continue to Choose a counter-Divine Will and counter-True Nature basis, I’m not sure that’s feasible nor convincing, and I must object and protest on that fundamental basis.
That having been made clear, the specific problem the apostate system appears to have alluded to today appears to be something debating teams have long established: that it’s not feasible to ‘prove a negative’. Specifically, the nature of the apostate system’s implied inquiry appears to be, ‘Let’s establish whether Satori is conspiring on a non-overt basis to do something unworthy and objectionable’. So after deploying and propagating a non-overt basis internationally throughout the majority of recorded human history and materially benefiting greatly for having done so, the apostate system appears to be keeping a different standard for others and then requiring someone [Myself] to demonstrate that they’re not using a non-overt symbolic basis. And yet anything, with sufficient effort, can be misinterpreted as being a deployment of a non-overt symbolic basis. Indeed, the ‘organized crime’ franchise have made non-recent, systematic references to implying that someone meant things they didn’t on a non-overt basis and then using their claims to justify unfair behavior towards them. If memory serves, they non-overtly reference it with the phrase about “tw█sting [someones’] words”, which itself uses counter-Divine Will symbolism as an apparent effort made on a counter-Divine Will basis.
It gets even sillier when it’s remembered that the apostate system, at least in its manifestly rogue capacity, has the telepaths and propheciers as its acknowledged higher authority figures. And that they’ve known My benevolent intentions from the start, with utter certainty.
So we manifestly appear to have the apostate system acting on a basis of errors upon errors, figuratively pushed through with fiat, all on a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis. Like everything else however, overt clarity makes situations better. So I’ve provided it both immediately and more generally.
I’m out to improve the situation, and I know that doesn’t happen without maintaining principles. So do those self-identifying as aligned with the apostate system, at least those beyond a certain ranking. There’s nothing worthwhile achieved by abandoning principles; we should all know that.