I didn't want to use 'Israel' in the title thread to stir things up, unnecessarily!

But here's an excerpt and the link:

[size=4]Israel's right to defense[/size=4]

Posted: April 15, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave a remarkable speech before the United States Senate last week.

Pointing out that a schizophrenic United States is unlikely to win the war against a single-minded terrorist enemy, he called eloquently for America to think clearly and act nobly. And he limned the absurdity of the half-witted and craven Euro-Powell demand for Israel to accept a cease-fire in the war against terror.

[b]"Though we are assured by friends that we have the right to defend ourselves," said Netanyahu, "we are effectively asked not to exercise that right."[/b]

Netanyahu reminded Americans of the spirit of our first response to the Sept. 11 outrage – we saw with certainty then that "the war on terror can be won with clarity and courage or lost with confusion and vacillation."

President Bush, said Netanyahu, laid out a vision "that had the moral and strategic clarity necessary to win the war on terror." Terrorism was defined as "the deliberate targeting of civilians in order to achieve political ends," and it was "never justified."

See remainder of article at:[url]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27229[/url]

Eric The(KeyesIn2004!)Hun[>]:)]

Question:

Is Israel's present moves at self-defense obstructing OUR planning against Iraq?

If so, then what else could Bush do but try to keep Israel on a short leash like we did in the Gulf War when 39 Scuds landed in Israel.



BTW, I just can't get over the biblical significance of those [b]39[/b] strikes against Israel during the Gulf War. Anyone suppose that's meaningful or was it just coincidence?

What is the biblical significance of the number 39?

The Law permitted [b]40[/b] lashes only!

If the administrator of the lashing accidentally miscounted and gave [b]41[/b] lashes, and the victim died, the administrator of the lashes was guilty of murder!

So to save himself, the administrator would always stop at [b]39[/b]!

Aren't you glad you have me?[img]http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/images/smilies/happyyid.gif[/img]

Eric The(Legal)Hun[>]:)]

The number 40 is the number of "Trial" or "Judgement".

The Great Flood lasted 40 days and nights.
The Jews wandered in the desert for 40 years.
Moses was on the Mount for 40 days.
Jonah warned of Ninevah's overthrow in 40 days.
Jesus went into the wilderness and was tempted for 40 days.
Lawful punishment included 40 lashes.


The number [b]39[/b] is the number of "Mercy"
It is a number that implies that God is merciful (Jesus recieved only 39 lashes...)

I just keep learning.

You know, [b]The_Macallan[/b], I'm not certain that Jesus received 'no more than 39 lashes.'

At His trial before Herod, maybe He received only 39 lashes, but the Bible is only silent on whether any lashes at all were given in the court of Herod.

At His trial before Pontius Pilate, however, there was no such safeguard as a magic number of 'forty lashes, save one.'

Pilate ordered Christ 'scourged', which has no limitations, and was done with a flagellum, at least in the First Century AD.

Romans would sometimes flog criminals to death and then crucify their bodies.

What I'm getting to in all this is that the image on the Shroud of Turin shows the features of someone who received way in excess of 39 lashes, beginning at the top of his shoulders and all the way down to the back of the calves of his legs.

Note that I did not capitalize the 'his' in any instance in the preceding paragraph. I just don't know the answer to that man's identity.

But, at least I'm honest about it.

Eric The(Believing)Hun[>]:)]

Agreed, Pilate probably intended to kill him by scourging rather than crucifixion. The fact that he was probably scourged both by Herod and by Pilate implies his back would most certainly bear more than 39 marks.

In addition, the scourges were often with bands of cords with knots and thorns ("scorpions") so even a single swipe would yield multiple stripes.

So what does Alan Keyes have to say about all this?

He wasn't even mentioned in the article.