That "political motivation" is what makes his statement suspect. He'd say that about anyone who didn't fit his "ideal" of what a Mandalorian "should" be. This would likely include any who still follow the old ways. It's the same as saying someone is not a "true" American or a "true" Fan, because that person doesn't follow the same philosophy as you. If you want to distance yourself, and your people from their warrior past, it makes political sense to claim that someone who still follows that path does not belong to your people. That inherently makes his statement suspect. He is an unreliable witness.

By contrast, Watto has nothing to gain by attributing his immunity to Qui Gon's Mind Tricks to his species. If he were to lie, it would make more sense to claim that it was his own ability that kept Qui Gon from influencing him.

44 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No, but it is an ability Jedi were well known for.

That's not what I asked. It doesn't matter if they were known for it or not; please explain how it could be firmly established that any species was less susceptible to it than any other unless the Jedi made a general habit of mind-violating everyone whom they passed on the street or if the Republic was conducing species-specific studies to determine which of their member races were more or less susceptible to being mind-violated by their peacekeepers.

15 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

That "political motivation" is what makes his statement suspect. He'd say that about anyone who didn't fit his "ideal" of what a Mandalorian "should" be. This would likely include any who still follow the old ways. It's the same as saying someone is not a "true" American or a "true" Fan, because that person doesn't follow the same philosophy as you. That inherently makes his statement suspect. He is an unreliable witness.

And yet his statement is still the only statement regarding Jango's status as a Mandalorian on-screen. LFL - and Filoni's team in particular - aren't dumb people. If Almec's statement was intended to be suspect or contradicted, it would have been presented that way.

So, if you'll kindly point me to Almec's statement being proven wrong (or even simply disputed) on screen, I'll gladly concede the point.

5 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

And yet his statement is still the only statement regarding Jango's status as a Mandalorian on-screen. LFL - and Filoni's team in particular - aren't dumb people. If Almec's statement was intended to be suspect or contradicted, it would have been presented that way.

So, if you'll kindly point me to Almec's statement being proven wrong (or even simply disputed) on screen, I'll gladly concede the point.

It was presented that way. Almec is a politician with a political agenda, one that needs to be distanced from "ruffians" like Jango Fett, and others who still followed the warrior ways of old. Now, was Jango born on Mandalore? No. He was born and raised on Concord Dawn. Thus it all comes down to point of view.

10 minutes ago, Vorzakk said:

That's not what I asked. It doesn't matter if they were known for it or not; please explain how it could be firmly established that any species was less susceptible to it than any other unless the Jedi made a general habit of mind-violating everyone whom they passed on the street or if the Republic was conducing species-specific studies to determine which of their member races were more or less susceptible to being mind-violated by their peacekeepers.

Simple. If enough of a sampling of certain species consistently shows immunity to Mind Tricks, or some other ability, encounter after encounter, they can certainly conclude that the species as a whole are immune to that ability. It has also been established that it is how Toydarians brains are structured that makes them immune.

54 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

It was presented that way. Almec is a politician with a political agenda, one that needs to be distanced from "ruffians" like Jango Fett, and others who still followed the warrior ways of old.

I just rewatched the episode. It wasn't presented as suspect.

Almec: "Master Kenobi, Mandalore's violent past is behind us. All of our warriors were exiled to our moon, Concordia. They died out years ago."
Obi-Wan: "Hmm. Are you certain? I recently encountered a man who wore Mandalorian armor, Jango Fett."
Almec: "Jango Fett was a common bounty hunter. How he acquired that armor is beyond me."

This statement has not been contradicted on screen.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No. He was born and raised on Concord Dawn. Thus it all comes down to point of view.

I see. So you can point me to where this was established on screen, contradicting Almec's on-screen assertion, yes?

It was established that he was born on Concord Dawn in Jango Fett: Open Seasons, there is nothing that has changed that. Even Pablo Hidalgo mentioned that Jango has claimed Concord Dawn heritage, and Hidalgo neither confirms nor denies the truth of that claim. Whatvwe do know is that Fett was not from Mandalore and was not Mandalorian by blood. He was only Mandalorian by adoption.

Almec considered Fett as a pretender. That can easily be attributed to politics, and Fett not being from Mandalore itself. The fact that Almec claimed that the warrior clans all died out turned out to also be a lie, also shows him to be an unreliable witness. It was in his political interests to make both of those claims. That makes his statement suspect.

Not sure what bearing Open Seasons has on anything considering it's not canon. Pablo's statements hold a bit more weight, but still, sounds pretty insignificant.

Might Almec be lying? Sure, I guess. But "he might just not know what he's talking about" seems like a flimsy explanation to justify your own ideas.

Why can't you just settle for "the canon material hasn't really focused enough on this to make any definitive judgements" and move on? This is just getting embarrassing.

6 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

He also attributed susceptibility to money to his species, but you're not applying that aspect to the species as a whole.

Because that would be stupid?

We all here have the social competence to differentiate between a statement about biology backed up by what happens on screen, and a joking reference to wanting to get paid, right?

Come on.

6 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

It was established that he was born on Concord Dawn in Jango Fett: Open Seasons, there is nothing that has changed that. Even Pablo Hidalgo mentioned that Jango has claimed Concord Dawn heritage, and Hidalgo neither confirms nor denies the truth of that claim. Whatvwe do know is that Fett was not from Mandalore and was not Mandalorian by blood. He was only Mandalorian by adoption.

Almec considered Fett as a pretender. That can easily be attributed to politics, and Fett not being from Mandalore itself. The fact that Almec claimed that the warrior clans all died out turned out to also be a lie, also shows him to be an unreliable witness. It was in his political interests to make both of those claims. That makes his statement suspect.

Open Seasons - a comic published under the old EU, with its well-established rule of “it counts until and unless contradicted on screen.”

It has been contradicted on screen, and this was done prior to.....

Open Seasons - a comic published under the old EU, which was wiped away, with the proviso that some elements might be utilized in the new canon.

Nothing in the current canon has indicated that it has been rolled back in, particularly in light of the Clone Wars line.

So, I once again ask you to point me to a reference on screen that debunks Almec’s statement.

2 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

Because that would be stupid?

We all here have the social competence to differentiate between a statement about biology backed up by what happens on screen, and a joking reference to wanting to get paid, right?

Come on.

Please bear in mind that my point on this matter is to engage in a friendly debate about the reliability of taking Watto’s statement as a universal truth about an entire species. Do I understand what Lucas was trying to get across? Sure. But his phrasing (as it sometimes is - recall the notorious quote, “George, you can write this s**t, but you sure can’t speak it.”) is clumsy enough to come across as both elements being attributed to Watto’s species.

And, if we jump franchises for an example...in Trek (for better or for worse), we do have the Ferengi, culturally wired to seek monetary gain. So is it really that stupid to - until later contradicted on screen - take Watto’s statement as establishing Toydarians as Star Wars Ferengi?

Part of what debunks statement is that the first part of that very statement was proven to be a lie. He made the claim that the warrior clans were all dead. This was a bold faced lie. Clan Viszla was very much alive, Clan Wren was very much alive. Etc. all of the Death Watch clans were alive, as were the Old Mandalorian clans out on other worlds. That alone makes Almec's statement about Jango highly suspect and colored by political agendas.

3 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Please bear in mind that my point on this matter is to engage in a friendly debate about the reliability of taking Watto’s statement as a universal truth about an entire species. Do I understand what Lucas was trying to get across? Sure. But his phrasing (as it sometimes is - recall the notorious quote, “George, you can write this s**t, but you sure can’t speak it.”) is clumsy enough to come across as both elements being attributed to Watto’s species.

And, if we jump franchises for an example...in Trek (for better or for worse), we do have the Ferengi, culturally wired to seek monetary gain. So is it really that stupid to - until later contradicted on screen - take Watto’s statement as establishing Toydarians as Star Wars Ferengi?

Yes, because we do have multiple examples of Toydarians who are not "greedy" merchants.

3 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Part of what debunks statement is that the first part of that very statement was proven to be a lie. He made the claim that the warrior clans were all dead. This was a bold faced lie. Clan Viszla was very much alive, Clan Wren was very much alive. Etc. all of the Death Watch clans were alive, as were the Old Mandalorian clans out on other worlds. That alone makes Almec's statement about Jango highly suspect and colored by political agendas.

Then you’ll have no trouble pointing out where on-screen his statement about Jango is clearly debunked.

At this point in time, Open Seasons is - at most - the story Jango told about his origins, one that was contradicted by Almec.

Upon Obi-Wan discovering Death Watch still existed, Satine could have easily said that, yes, Jango was Mandalorian after all.

With an interview with Filoni readily available which establishes the intent of the line - to establish on screen Lucas’ determination that Jango isn’t Mandalorian, we can tie most everything we’ve been tossing around here together thusly -

- Even prior to the “EU purge,” ancillary works such as books and comics were considered to be canon until and unless contradicted on screen.

- In what is now Legends continuity, Jango was established as being Mandalorian.

- Prior to the “EU purge,” there was (and still remains) only one piece of on-screen information regarding Jango’s status as a Mandalorian, and that is a statement that he isn’t one. Until and unless contradicted on screen, this supersedes Open Seasons.

- If we accept the expositional statement of one shady character regarding his species and culture as authoritative, and it’s similar to other such expositional statements, we have no reason not to accept yet another expositional statement from a character as authoritative unless it is disproven.

- If we understand the intent of the last part of that shady character’s expositional statement and accept it, then definitively knowing the intent of the line given to the second character (thanks to an interview with the executive producer), then there is no reason not to accept that second character’s information.

Now, is there wiggle room in there to keep Jango’s now twice-purged backstory in one’s headcanon? Sure. There’s even a good possibility that this was done intentionally, as fundamental changes to what was “known” about Mandalorian culture were being made in that story.

But, as it currently stands, Jango isn’t Mandalorian in any way, shape, or form, based upon the only information on the matter presented on screen (or, for that matter, in the currently established canon).

22 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Yes, because we do have multiple examples of Toydarians who are not "greedy" merchants.

Which is why I said “until later contradicted on screen.”

30 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Please bear in mind that my point on this matter is to engage in a friendly debate about the reliability of taking Watto’s statement as a universal truth about an entire species.

Then don't act as if it isn't clear what he's talking about. Dishonesty is not conducive to a friendly debate.

30 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Do I understand what Lucas was trying to get across? Sure. But his phrasing (as it sometimes is - recall the notorious quote, “George, you can write this s**t, but you sure can’t speak it.”) is clumsy enough to come across as both elements being attributed to Watto’s species.

Yes, and that's the joke. When I say I'm an Asian student, as you can see by the shape of my eyes and hanging out in the library to study, you wouldn't act as if I'm talking about Asian racial traits when I make this joking reference to Asian school test scores and studiousness.

30 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

And, if we jump franchises for an example...in Trek (for better or for worse), we do have the Ferengi, culturally wired to seek monetary gain. So is it really that stupid to - until later contradicted on screen - take Watto’s statement as establishing Toydarians as Star Wars Ferengi?

Yes, it really is that stupid.

32 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Then don't act as if it isn't clear what he's talking about. Dishonesty is not conducive to a friendly debate.

Part of the larger discussion is centered around interpreting lines of dialogue in opposition to the known intent of that dialogue. It's being used for illustrative purposes.

37 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Yes, it really is that stupid.

Because Star Wars has never applied the traits of a single character to their entire culture?

Just now, Nytwyng said:

Because Star Wars has never applied the traits of a single character to their entire culture?

Oh, it's a vague "Star Wars" now, not just the movies and shows. How convenient. Because the very movie that introduces Watto also shows numerous members of established species in new roles, which completely undermines your point here.

You know what's meant with the line, and you know that the movies don't do the culture of stereotypes things the EU does. Your entire argument rests on deliberate misinterpretations and not holding your own words to the same standards you apply to others.

25 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Oh, it's a vague "Star Wars" now, not just the movies and shows. How convenient. Because the very movie that introduces Watto also shows numerous members of established species in new roles, which completely undermines your point here.

You know what's meant with the line, and you know that the movies don't do the culture of stereotypes things the EU does. Your entire argument rests on deliberate misinterpretations and not holding your own words to the same standards you apply to others.

Part of my point is that very same convenience of cherry-picking what information presented on screen is taken as accurate (and, where applicable, universally absolute). It would appear that the illustrative purpose that I applied worked here.

Just for the record, I've not dismissed the ancillary media outright in this discussion. Merely pointed out that it's always held the status of "it counts until and unless it's contradicted on screen." I have, though, tried to stick as closely to screen material as possible, just for clarity's sake, since part of the discussion is about that very thing: on-screen information contradicting ancillary media (some of which was already invalidated by the "EU purge").

Sorry if it seems to you as if I have any ulterior motives. I promise I'm not as shady as a Toydarian junk dealer on a backwater planet.

10 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

It has also been established that it is how Toydarians brains are structured that makes them immune.

Im curious, where?

5 hours ago, Tom Cruise said:

Why can't you just settle for "the canon material hasn't really focused enough on this to make any definitive judgements" and move on?

That's the problem. I think the more reasonable contributors have accepted that, but some appear to have a maniacal interest in continuing this pedantic absurdity. I apologize for feeding the trolls when I should have ignored them instead.

25 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Part of my point is that very same convenience of cherry-picking what information presented on screen is taken as accurate (and, where applicable, universally absolute). It would appear that the illustrative purpose that I applied worked here.

Sorry, but this seems like just an excuse. "He did it first! So I get to do it, too!"

11 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

If enough of a sampling of certain species

If it happened enough for a statistically-meaningful sample to be obtained, then Anakin was right: the Jedi are evil.

30 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Sorry, but this seems like just an excuse. "He did it first! So I get to do it, too!"

I'm sorry that you feel that way. I'd say that using someone's own methodology to illustrate a point is a fair and standard tactic in discussions such as this. It's often used - as I did here - to say, "If we look at Topic A the same way you're looking at Topic B, I hope you'll see where I'm coming from."

8 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

I'm sorry that you feel that way. I'd say that using someone's own methodology to illustrate a point is a fair and standard tactic in discussions such as this. It's often used - as I did here - to say, "If we look at Topic A the same way you're looking at Topic B, I hope you'll see where I'm coming from."

This calls the "Joke's on them, I'm only pretending to be ******" meme to mind.

If you, air quotes, pretend to do a thing by doing the thing, you've still done the thing. And when you're doing it to illustrate that the thing is bad, well, you've just acted badly, and also normalized that thing.