You for sure.

>>conspiracy theories in general are unacceptable. I, for one, don't accept them. You do. That's the difference between us, I guess. <<

One of many differences, but the most important one is that you rely on unproved hypothesis, for example, on the hypothesis posed by Yanukovich’s adviser, public relation specialist. It is very likely that his statement is just a part of election campaign against Yuschenko so called “black PR” based on stereotypes created in Soviet era. You just like it: “colonial masters the Poles” is more then 60 years old but still alive.
So my hypothesis is “conspiracy theory” and theory of Yanukovich’s adviser is not “conspiracy theory”. What is the base of your classification? Orange is in general unacceptable? Bankers? People using Ukrainian? Not sentenced?

>>We'll just have to wait until you become a more intelligent and sophisticated observer of politics.<<

You are so sure... So we will also have to wait until Kwasniewski, Adamkus, Solana become a more intelligent and sophisticated observers of politics. In that company I can wait. I can also wait until you become a more intelligent in general. I believe in people but some persons like you make it difficult.

>>As I've been corrected today, even western media reported on the allegations of electoral fraud in favor of Yuschenko. You didn't know about that? Read up on the subject.<<

Where? What is your source? What kind of electoral fraud do you mean? Any details?

>> Probably because you are thick and uninquisitive. <<

I extract it from previous paragraph. The paragraph without your unproved “hypothesis” looks better. Such inserts do not add any value. Should we wait until you mature to be able to exchange arguments\opinions without insulting?

>>"His concerns have been echoed by international observers. That is all." -- that's not quite correct. His concerns have been echoed by western observers only. CIS observers, for example, found electoral violations in western regions of Ukraine, in favor of Yuschenko.<<

At least CIS observers had access to pooling places. Western observers in many cases do not have such luck. It is also question about scale of electoral violation in favour of Yuschenko, details please!! And following your way of thinking: the violations in western regions have been echoed by CIS observers only. Whatever it means.

>>correction: according to western propaganda, Yuschenko is "a pro-Western liberal". Personally, I don't really know how to classify him, because words mean nothing, and he haven't really had an opportunity to act so far.<<

I took it from “the western propaganda” and in original (BBC) it was: “Yuschenko is concerned as a pro-Western liberal”. Can you see the difference between “is concerned” and “is”?
About propaganda – I suppose that you have nothing against when I call anything, which is published by Russian media as “the Russian propaganda” as you do while describing western media?

>>don't forget, he is also provided with very generous financial support from them [the EU, Bush, Kwasniewski].<<

And Yanukovich is getting money from Putin. My statement is as proved as yours.

>>western propaganda claims Yanukovich is pro-Russian. That's not the case.<<
>>-- no, Russia supports Yanukovich because Russia is opposed to Yuschenko, not because of Yanukovich.<<

Enemy of my enemy is my friend. Maybe. Why Yuschenko is so dangerous to Russia? Yushchenko has never indulged in anti-Russian rhetoric. What is the reason?

>.-- that's a pretty idiotic claim, considering that "Russian advisors" were simply mercenaries for hire (such as the same Pavlovskii). There is no need for political technologists in Russia any more, due to the fact that Putin's popularity among the Russian public can determine the outcome of any election. So this bunch migrated to Ukraine looking for employment. And good riddance.<<

That is pretty naive claim. How many of them are hired by Yuschenko?
Russian TV channels and spin doctors close to the Kremlin portray Yushchenko as an agent of the West who would plunge Ukraine into civil war. They do it voluntarily.

>>you can repeat it as often as you like; however, it still will not become true. I've written on the motivations of western politicos extensively here. Read it, then argue using facts, not your unsubstantiated claims.<<

Your claims about motivation of western politicos are as valid as my assessment. It is interesting how somebody’s claims become facts. More letters/posts make them correct, completely true, and accurate?
If I understand you correctly motivation of western politicos is “bad” because their actions are against Russia raison d’état? So according to such kind of logic only Russian have right to determine what is correct and justified. Everyone else’s actions including Ukrainians are bad intentioned. But it is bed assumption. Let Ukrainian establish their own way. They have two options and let them make a choice in election without fraud.

>>I really don't care about Lithuanians. I'm just pointing out the obvious -- Ukrainians aren't too thrilled about Poles.<<
You are just beating the death horse.

>>”17% Russians on their territory and even more Sovietised/Russified - Ukrainians who does not speak Ukrainian. Now it is backfiring.” -- you should learn Ukrainian history before making a poor attempt at sarcasm. Just to avoid embarrassment.<<

I do not see anything embarrassing for me. I just wrote that 17% population is Russian and even more Ukrainians who do not even speak any Ukrainian. Ethnic Russians are under Kremlin influence and in general are Yanukovich supporters.
About Sovietisation/Russification of Ukraine – to assess it we just should know if number of Russians were growing more rapidly in comparison to growth rate (per region, year) in Soviet era. And how many books were published in Russian in comparison to Ukrainian (per year). Can anyone from Ukraine help? I am sure that such simple method can show the truth.