Board of Deputies President Condemns Cameron's Shunning of JNF

Davis: "Whatever the reasons David Cameron may have for stepping down as patron of the JNF, I have no doubt he has not responded to pressure from anti-Israel groups and there is no basis for this assertion."

Ronson: "It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that the Prime Minister's decision to step down from the JNF had anything to do with pressure from anti-Israel groups or reflect a negative opinion about Israel."

Wineman: "If the motivation was about Israel then we condemn it utterly"

All three of these statements are consistent with one another. Let's formalize - let X be "it was about Israel" and Y be "we condemn it".

Wineman says (X -> Y), while Davis and Ronson say ~X. Wineman doesn't say (X & (X -> Y) and therefore doesn't say Y.

So what's your point?

Davis: "he has not responded to anti-Israel groups". But if he did it off his own bat because deep down he really does not like Israel - then that's ok?
Ronson: "or reflect a negative opinion about Israel -"ridiculous to suggest" why so? - Pressure in the Commons, negative vibes coming from the Jewish leadership itself the only PM since 1901 to do so.
Wineman - Puts the ball squarely in Mr Cameron's court to provide a cogent reason why he has stepped down when none of his predessors felt the need to do so especially say Ted Heath who was famous (or should I say infamous) for refusing to allow American Planes to refuel in the UK when delivering arms to Israel in the Yom Kippur War. Why has the Jewish Community not bombarded Number 10 requesting Cameron to clarify his position.
That I think is the point.

Well done, Inigo. You got it right. And, err, Wineman is the president of the BoD, not chairman.
And the question still stands: if Jonathan and other like-minded people are so angered by the "craven" attitude of the leadership of British Jewry, why doesn't he and his mates set up outside the establishment and try and become the sole legitimate voice? I reckon they're frit, because they know they represent a minority within a minority.
One last thing: weren't you campaigning for the Tories last year, Jonathan?

Millis - Wineman was chairman of the Board Meeting - simples! And I was not even there.

By the way Inigi Wineman as reported did not using your formula "say X -> Y" he said "if X -> Y" which begs the question which everyone seems too lilly-livered to ask presumably because they might get upset if they heard the truth and then would be forced to have to do something about it - which as we all know they are unwilling to do.

Advis3r: in formal logic notation, you don't need to write the "if".

. It doesn't mean "

".

Absolutely, right, Inigo. The "If" is the crucial word here. It's a conditional Type I sentence, modified through lack of sequence of tenses.

If that is the case then may I suggest the notation should have been Y<=>X
We could equally say where
X=Cameron resigns from JNF
Y=Cameron is not sympathetic to Israel

X ⊢ Y

Does anyone care about this tedious parish pump stuff :?

Cameron resigned because he needs to distance
himself from the nasty racist state that Israel stands
for. Supporting Israel is now a vote loser- Cameron
is a shrewd poltician.

Thanks for confirming that simonq obviously you have no idea what the word racist means and I neither have the time nor the inclination to even attempt to teach a rabid bigot such as your rottenself why you are. However thanks for the timely reminder to the Jews of the UK that they are only tolerated by you and your antisemitic cohorts now perhaps the Jews will start packing while there is still time and leave you to tender mercies of the Islamist fundamentalists.

Simoneq, do you ever say anything new? You display all the intellect of a windup doll. Just wind you up, and you sprout your favorite buzzword, "racist", and tar Israel with it.