Luciano G. Del Negro's Overview

Current
Vice President, Quebec region at Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs
Past
Executive Director at Quebec- Israel Committee
Member at Immigration and Refugee Board
Member at Quebec Parole Board

He is a Montreal Jew involved in his community organizations ?

What use is listing an opinion without that info???

p.s. I *always* look up info on authorship of articles, whether pure opinion like this or a piece of pure scholarship or, as increasingly prevalent in the yellow press aka MSM, a half&half bastardization.

Odds are that he's a Liberal Party voter too since most Quebec Jews are Liberal Party supporters , they don't vote for the Party Québécois .

Doesn't mean he couldn't be Tory, or NDP, or Green. To say nothing of the fact that many of those who support a strong mixed economy (socialism/free-market) would have no problem voting PQ if it were strategically best - there's a huge number of "English Canadians" who strongly support the Quebecois culture and wouldn't think twice about voting PQ to keep the likes of e.g. Harper out. Canada is a robust multicultural multinational state with a free-ranging parliamentary system that seems to function best when there's a minority rather than a majority federal gov't (such gov'ts tend to be "center left", where a huge "center" majority in Canada is very strongly defensive of such things a single-payer NHC system, etc.)

The National Assembly so to speak.

sheesh. You like straining at gnats, don't you?

Provincial governments call referendums and hold the future of Quebec and Canada at stake , québécois in the federal government are few and far between and of little importance.
Previously prime ministers came from Quebec but those days are over.
The most important government within Quebec is the provincial government , they even objected to last weeks Federal budget because it had new projects and money for job training and they said they didn't want anything to do with this federal initiative .

And I'd guess a lot of them voted NDP federally in 2011.

Amen to that.

I wish everyone agreed.

the problem with identity politics as one sees here, is that it places ideas with a particular person or party, therefore making the idea "good or bad, not based on its merits but based on "who said it."

which is a rather lazy and immature way of looking at an idea, it does have the advantage however of having a group agreeement via the groupthink mentality all can agree on all ideas, based on who said them, thereby reducing the need to actually think about any particular idea and maybe even "disagree with the group" (ohhh horrors of horrors.....you might be barred from playing together!)


just for fun who said this and no googling:
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people.

so if the right person said this..i guess its ok.....

A man with a name like "Luciano del Negro" sounds like he could get shit done.

He's JEWISH?!

Have you alerted the moderators?

The whole reaction here though is weird.

Can you prove he isn't Kenyan?
Can you prove he isn't a Marxist?

Can you prove that the reactions of holdencaulfield, oberliner and you are "very weird", rather than being normal for you three?

Do you want to hire Orly Taitz to prove your case?

That his job advocating for Israel was cited as a way of attacking the content of the article.

I mean, aren't there a lot of articles posted here by Palestinian advocates?

Surely you aren't claiming that my post, which consisted in its entirety of a copy/paste of some bio info on the author, attacked either the author or the content of his article?

That isn't how my post was meant. I meant one thing and one thing only, to post info on the background of the author. The fact that the author has a job advocating for Israel shouldn't suggest to anybody that he does anything but that, in his official capacity - and it certainly shouldn't suggest that he should be condemned for doing his job and/or stating his opinion in an op-ed. Not IMO at any rate. IMO the only thing such info should suggest is that the author of the article has a particular bias, so while the article might be informative it is still true that taking that bias into account makes perfect sense.

We live in a complex world, in one sense a "global village" but in another sense a fractured shell that's been continuously at war for centuries - quite literally everyone being a victim. News and views found in "the media" should always be taken with a grain of salt and checked, sourced, and critiqued, the intent being to expand one's breadth of understanding of the broad range of a subject. It is never good enough to have some limited second or third-hand awareness of some particular facts, and some particular pundits' opinions about those isolated facts.

I know I have to be preaching to the converted, here, leaving me confused regarding the basis for your critique of my post.

Hard to read what a "ha ha ha thanks" is supposed to mean.

"Thanks for the info (haha, such a bias should've been included in the OP, considering the volatility of the subject matter)"
What else could it mean?

Just curious.

Apologies.