To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Bible Codes and Sun Storms
From: bpr-list@philologos.org(BPR)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:00:49 -0500

From: owner-bpr@philologos.org

Contingency Planners Warned About Effects Of Powerful Sun Storms

-- (INTERNET WIRE) -- 12/21/99 -- Contingency planners have
received strong warnings regarding the likely effects of Solar
Max, the increasingly turbulent space weather that is expected
to peak next month and last for three months.

If there are significant power outages, computer failures or
telecommunications disruptions in early 2000, they may be
related to Solar Max and not the Y2K bug, according to the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Said NOAA's director, Dr. D. James Baker, "When Solar Maximum
occurs, the sun bursts at its seams with explosive power, and as
it churns there is potential for electrical power outages, radio
problems, and the disabling of satellites. This can disrupt
communications, including broadcast transmissions and pagers."

Emphatic confirmation of these warnings has come from
respected, nationally-known mathematician R. Edwin Sherman,
president of a risk management consulting firm with Fortune 500
clients.

Sherman and his researchers have conducted extensive
cryptological analysis of the 3,500-year-old Hebrew Torah. They
have uncovered a very large number of statistically significant
codes in a very short passage that graphically depict the same
scenario detailed by the NOAA.

Some of these codes potentially narrow down the time window to
the Hebrew year 5760, which began in mid-September 1999, and to
a point in time described by the word, "millennium," the number
2000 and various possible equivalents for "Y2K."

Full story:
http://www.internetwire.com/technews/tn/01986045.dsl

_________________________
To subscribe to BPR send a message to bpr-list@philologos.org
with the word "subscribe" in the subject. To unsubscribe send a
message to the same address with the word "unsubscribe" in the
subject.

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Re: Bible Codes and Sun Storms
From: bpr-list@philologos.org(BPR)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 09:24:12 -0500

From: "Moza" <moza7@netzero.net>

For more interesting "bug" finds in the book of Numbers please see:

The "Millennium Bug" Computer Problem in the Bible Codes
http://philologos.org/bpr/files/Misc_Studies/ms-015-a.htm
which is Bryan T. Huie's original find coupled with my own research.

> Contingency Planners Warned About Effects Of Powerful Sun Storms
>
> -- (INTERNET WIRE) -- 12/21/99 -- Contingency planners have
> received strong warnings regarding the likely effects of Solar
> Max, the increasingly turbulent space weather that is expected
> to peak next month and last for three months.
>
> If there are significant power outages, computer failures or
> telecommunications disruptions in early 2000, they may be
> related to Solar Max and not the Y2K bug, according to the
> National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
>
> Said NOAA's director, Dr. D. James Baker, "When Solar Maximum
> occurs, the sun bursts at its seams with explosive power, and as
> it churns there is potential for electrical power outages, radio
> problems, and the disabling of satellites. This can disrupt
> communications, including broadcast transmissions and pagers."
>
> Emphatic confirmation of these warnings has come from
> respected, nationally-known mathematician R. Edwin Sherman,
> president of a risk management consulting firm with Fortune 500
> clients.
>
> Sherman and his researchers have conducted extensive
> cryptological analysis of the 3,500-year-old Hebrew Torah. They
> have uncovered a very large number of statistically significant
> codes in a very short passage that graphically depict the same
> scenario detailed by the NOAA.
>
> Some of these codes potentially narrow down the time window to
> the Hebrew year 5760, which began in mid-September 1999, and to
> a point in time described by the word, "millennium," the number
> 2000 and various possible equivalents for "Y2K."
>
> Full story:
> http://www.internetwire.com/technews/tn/01986045.dsl

> See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.
>
>

_________________________
To subscribe to BPR send a message to bpr-list@philologos.org
with the word "subscribe" in the subject. To unsubscribe send a
message to the same address with the word "unsubscribe" in the
subject.

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.

========
To: bpr-list@philologos.org (BPR Mailing List)
Subject: [BPR] - Arutz-7 News items (12/23/99)
From: bpr-list@philologos.org(BPR)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 17:28:28 -0500

From: "Moza" <moza7@netzero.net>

SYRIA: WEAK OR STRONG?
The findings of the Jaffe Institute for Strategic Studies, released this
week, have placed Prime Minister Barak in an awkward position. The
Institute found that the Syrian army has become greatly weakened and is
incapable of fighting against the IDF. Barak hurried to announce
afterwards that the information he has shows that the Syrian army is very
strong and professional.

Speaking with Arutz-7 today, Jaffe Institute researcher Yiftach Shapir
noted, "We presently see Israel at a window of opportunity - in the sense
that its enemies are either signed on peace deals with Israel, or are very
weak. In the case of Syria, we estimate that its army is very weak, with
almost no military options." Arutz-7's Haggai Segal asked Shapir how this
jibes with Ehud Barak's claim that should the deal with Damascus fall
through, Syria would send "dozens of Scuds" into Israel. "This just
confirms our view," Shapir explained. "Syria merely has the capability of
scaring and even terrorizing Israel, but not of carrying out a full-blown
war. Syria has not updated its army since the 1973 Yom Kippur War - in
sharp contrast with the fully modernized Egyptian army, which boasts new
U.S.-built Abrams tanks, F-16 and Mirage 2000 fighter jets. Israel, too,
has modernized its army."

Segal asked: "If this is the case, why do we have to hurry and make peace
with Syria, if it doesn't endanger us?" Shapir: "Here is where we get into
the realm of analysis and conclusions. This is exactly the debate in
Israel. There are people who think that if Israel's goal is to secure
peace with all of its neighboring states, it is preferable to do so from a
position of strength, when you have more leverage to determine the terms."

Col. Moshe Leshem was skeptical about the Jaffe Institute study and
conclusions. Leshem told Arutz-7's Ron Meir today that, "The Jaffe
Institute is basically a left-wing institute... Whatever they do is
[designed] to support the left-wing policies of the government." He took
issue with Jaffe's finding that the Syrian T-72 tanks are outdated, saying
that this is "under-estimating the Russian tank. Our tanks are not so much
more modern than the T-72." He also took issue with the Jaffe Center
assumption that Syria could be analyzed in isolation of other Arab powers,
explaining that except for the 1956 Sinai campaign, all the Arab-Israeli
conflicts pitted Israel against Arab coalitions. Leshem said that we must
therefore look at other potential enemies of Israel: "If one of these
countries has a substantial quantity of weapons, it will seek a coalition
with another Arab country [such as Syria], to outflank Israel and create
two fronts, which would divide and weaken Israeli forces."

Leshem also questioned the basic logic of the Jaffe Center contention that
Syrian military weakness justifies Israel's surrender of the Golan: "If
the Syrian army is a weak army, why should we give up these vital strategic
territories? What are we afraid of?" Leshem was unimpressed with Jaffe
research Shapir's above-mentioned contention that it is in the interest of
the stronger side to compromise, as it can determine the terms of
compromise. Without discounting the truth of this point regarding some of
Israel's more minor demands, Leshem said that Israel's very advantage - its
military superiority - will be nullified by the agreement:
        "Syria has already said that in order to have peace, [it has] to have a
strong army [provided by the U.S.] that will create a certain balance, and
that only this balance of forces can safeguard a peace treaty... I'm sure
also that there are also big, big pressures from the American weapons
industry for [this], because American industry stands to earn 20 or 30
billion dollars like they [did in] Egypt... If the Syrians actually have a
weak army... then why should we be the suckers to save them from their
own
destiny and give them whatever they want up to the last inch? If they are
so weak, then at least our bargaining position should be much stronger than
that which we are [adopting] right now!"

The entire interview with Col. Leshem can be heard on Arutz-7's website at
<a href="http://www.a7.org/engclips/231299/leshem-golan.ram">
www.a7.org/engclips/231299/leshem-golan.ram </a>

LIKUD STAYING OUT
Likud leader Ariel Sharon emphasized in no uncertain terms today that his
19-Knesset Member party would not join the government, and will not serve
as a substitute for Shas in the event that the latter leaves the
government. Sharon is scheduled to meet with Shas representatives today,
and will tell them the same. Speaking with Arutz-7 today, Sharon called
upon the Labor party not to threaten Shas by means of false rumors to the
effect that the Likud may join the government.

"Barak has not invited the Likud to join the government," Sharon said, "and
I would like to make it absolutely clear that the Likud has no plans to
join the government. We will rather make every effort to topple the
present government." Referring to the Likud-Labor coalition negotiations
of a few months ago, Sharon said, "we made it clear then that we would join
only if there would be a true partnership in policy-making and in
determining red lines." The opposition leader sharply criticized Barak not
for giving away the Golan, but for not getting anything in return for it:
"The Likud would never had conducted these talks with the same ineptitude
as Barak has done. It is unbelievable that he simply has not made any
demands. He is a diplomatic baby, a captive of his mistaken evaluations,
and a doll in the hands of a group of Americans who are calling the shots
in their own interests, who do not have Israel's interests at heart at all,
and who are taking advantage of Barak's inexperience. He did not demand
that the Syrians get out of Lebanon, that we retain [some presence] in the
Golan, that there be supervision on Iraq, that there be limitations on
Syrian re-armament, that there be normalization in the relations between
Syrian and Israel - nothing!... I can only say that if the Likud would
have been running the talks, it would have been a lot better."

Arutz Sheva News Service
  <http://www.arutzsheva.org>
Thursday, December 23, 1999 / Tevet 14, 5760

_________________________
To subscribe to BPR send a message to bpr-list@philologos.org
with the word "subscribe" in the subject. To unsubscribe send a
message to the same address with the word "unsubscribe" in the
subject.

See http://philologos.org/bpr for additional info.