This is also a pathetic attempt to berate the Jedi. Senator Oswaldt clearly depises the Jedi. You say that this is a Jedi propaganda. Why would the Jedi create such lies? Count Dooku was a Jedi that left the Old Jedi Order. A JEDI that decided to become a Sith Lord when the offer was on the table. That makes it a Sith to lead the Separatists. You also accused the Jedi of plotting with the Separatists. Do tell me, if they were the one plotting with the Separatists, then why did hundreds, if not thousands, of Jedi Knights died at the hands of the Separatists during the Clone Wars? Nobody would committ to a such operation unless they want to blast themselves to extinction on purpose. No, it was not the Jedi that plotted the Clone Wars. It was the Order of the Sith Lords that engineered the entire war, and the Jedi Knights were simply pawns to their scheme for galactic domination. If you take a step back and look really good at this, you would see that it was an excuse for Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine to dissolve the Old Republic, freedom, and democracy and transform into the very first Galactic Empire, and dictatorship.

You, Senator Oswaldt, do not understand how the Jedi operates. To many that lacks knowledge of the Jedi, or is simply ignorant, would view Master Skywalker as insane. But you must remember that the Jedi sees things where we cannot, due to their ability in the Force. I know this because I am friends with many Jedi due to my stepson being a Jedi. I will say this: I trust the Jedi with my life.

I will also say this: You, Senator Oswaldt, brings Imperial views into the Senate. We allowed that because it is the democratic thing to do. It is the right thing to do. We welcome all voices and opinions because the New Republic are pro-democracy. If we shoot down my voice and opinion, then we are no better than the formerly Galactic Empire. We approve this, we are starting down that path. I vote against THE CLONE WARS RESOLUTION.

Tremaine Fowlkes,
Senator of Mowgle

You ask me, Senator, "why would the Jedi create such lies?" I admit that I don't know; I'm not in Mr. Skywalker's head. It's too crowded in there as it is. What I do know is that the Jedi have historically kept many secrets from the people and even from the Senate. I did not "accuse the Jedi of plotting with the Separatists," I simply said that was far more likely than Palpatine, of all people, plotting with the Separatists. This is the difference between us, Senator—I don't make claims without facts. In my remarks, I cited facts. In your remarks, you cited rumors and innuendo. I see no need to respond to rumors and innuendo.

Believing what you're told to believe is not very "democratic" of you, Senator. I wonder, if Mr. Skywalker announced that the Force told him that you, Tremaine Fowlkes, have cheated on your wife, would you believe him? If not, would you continue to tell people that Mr. Skywalker should be believed more than you because he can "see things through the Force" and you can't? Because that's exactly what you're saying about this resolution, Senator, with no proof except what Mr. Skywalker "feels" is true. I for one do not think that every word a person says, Jedi or not, should always be believed without proof—especially not something so ridiculous as this Clone Wars fallacy.

And Senator, I will be referred to as Governor Oswaldt.

Men, women, and creatures of this Senate, the Senator from Mowgle exactly the sort of person I referred to in my remarks. If you vote against this measure, you are making common cause with him and his radical views. If you vote for this measure, you are making common sense.

I fail still to see what the condition of my sexual orientation has in relation to my position that their is as much validity to your side of the arguement as there is to Senator Fowlkes', other than some randomly picked aspect of my personal life for you to badger away at in an attempt provoke and annoy, and yet when challenged on the relevance, merely wish to repeat and reword your statement for playtime, rather than actually expand upon the subject matter and give a legitimate explaination to your parallel you are attempting to draw.

Once again, Senator, I'm attempting to understand on what basis you decide a thing is certain or is uncertain. However, since you're apparently uncertain of your sexual orientation, I suppose I've chosen a bad example. What, then, of the question I posed to Senator Fowlkes? If Mr. Skywalker announced, because "the Force told him so," that the Senator had cheated on his wife, would you then say that the facts of the matter are "up for debate and interpretation?" In this instance, there is a correct answer as to what did and did not occur. With regard to the Clone Wars, too, there is a correct answer as to what did and did not occur. And yet in one of these cases, the Clone Wars, you say the answer is "up for debate and interpretation." Why one, and not the other?

For your new example, it could be the Force, or it could be simple psychosis. Simple investigative work would clarify...although I doubt the ethics in raising such personal questions in the chamber as being respectful and proper procedure, Governor.