Wow, it has been a long time since I looked at OW Buthids.. But in his Saudi Arabia paper, I believe Hendrixson noted that he suspected L. q. hebreus was in fact a junior synonym of L. quinquestriatus, but did not officially synonymize it because either a lack of material or lack of type material (or both). If you want, I might be able to pull up the original description and Brent's work and see what what characters were being used to diagnose L. q. hebreus.
In conclusion, Hendrixson suggested that L. quinquestriatus was highly variable in terms of morphology and seemed to be of the opinion that L. q. hebreus was not a valid species. Again, this has not been done officially, due to the lack of type material.
In my opinion, what you have is L. quinquestriatus. Origin of geographically associated variants (if the morphology even is associated with geographical boundaries) is questionable and practically impossible to distinguish without locality data. Man, I would pay double for OW material that came with locality data! Ok....not rich enough to do that, but you get my point! : )
Thanks for sharing, this is an interesting species indeed.