Karma, Destiny, & Past Lives: Things that don't make sense about them

[Winston]

I've been wondering about something. Are karma and destiny just a bunch of pure baloney and BS? How do you explain the following?

1. Is it always best to follow your destiny or to accept something that is "destined to be"? If so, then how come following one's destiny does not always have a positive outcome?

For example, in the New Testament, the Apostle Paul followed his "destiny" and became a follower of Christ and wrote some of the greatest books of the Bible, inspiring many Christians of his time up til the present. Yet he ended up being imprisoned by the Romans and then executed. Why did God let that happen? Is that how he rewards faith and obedience, by letting his follower get executed?

And in the Old Testament, the prophet Isaiah followed his "destiny" too by serving as the mouthpiece of God and delivering ultimatums to the sinful people to get them to change their ways. He did what God wanted and did his will. Yet he ended up getting sawed in half in a log. In fact, many characters in the Bible ended up with a gruesome death or disappointing outcome (such as Moses). Why would God let that happen to those who follow his will and their destiny?

Now I'm not saying that these Biblical accounts are historical facts, but you get what I mean. Many people who have followed their destiny ended up dying or meeting a gruesome fate. Amelia Earhart did, and became a famous legendary female pilot and inspiration, but ended up vanishing during one of her missions. JFK followed his destiny and became a great US president, the last good genuine president that we had in fact, but he ended up getting assassinated. And his brother RFK was about to become president and follow his destiny too, yet he too got assassinated. Also, Martin Luther King Jr. followed his destiny and became a great civil rights leader for Blacks, uniting them, inspiring them and giving them hope, making waves throughout the country. Yet he too ended up getting assassinated.

If these people didn't follow their destiny, they probably wouldn't have been assassinated. So is it always a good thing to follow one's destiny? Or is it better to fight one's destiny, if it will lead to danger and more trouble than you can handle?

Destiny has a funny way of forcing its will in your life. If it really wants something, it will make you unhappy and make things go against you, until you follow your destiny. So it doesn't seem to really give you a choice whether to follow it or not. If you don't follow its path, then it blocks your chosen path with a wall, until you turn around and obey your destiny. Doesn't that suck? It shows how little control we have over our lives, doesn't it?

What do you think?

2. As to karma, something doesn't make sense here. If karma always gave one his/her just reward or punishment, then explain this:

How come George Bush, Tony Blair and Dick Cheney can start a war in Iraq, killing a million people in the process, many of which are innocent, yet nothing bad happens to them? They are richer than ever, above the law, and untouchable. How come karma doesn't do anything to them?

Yet JFK was a good president who was sincere, good hearted, compassionate, just and uncorruptible. He stood up for what was right and against the evil plans of the other branches of government. Yet he gets assassinated. Where is his good karma for being good? Why did karma let him get assassinated unjustly?

Also, RFK was also a very compassionate, kind, selfless, caring, and made the alleviation of suffering in the world the aim of his life. You couldn't find a more kind, pure and wholesome candidate running for president. Yet before he could become president, he got assassinated. What kind of karma was that? Why didn't karma reward him for his goodness and selflessness by saving his life or preventing his assassination? WTF is up with that?

It is said that when RFK was dying, his last words were "Is everyone alright?" because he cared more about others than himself. That's the kind of man he was. So why would karma let that happen to him? It doesn't make sense.

Same with Martin Luther King Jr. He did a lot of good for black people and civil rights. Yet karma lets him get assassinated too? Why? Where was his karmic reward for helping others?

And Gandhi stood for peace. He was noble and brave too. So why was he assassinated? And why didn't his good karma protect him?

Also, how come so many good wholesome selfless people die young? Hence the phrase, "Only the good die young". How does karma make sense in that?

Is it better to be evil than good, as long as you are in a high position of power above the law? How does karma fit in all this?

Any idea?

Some karma believers try to claim that such people receive their reward or punishment in the next life. But they have no proof of that. It's just a way of "sliding the issue away". So isn't that just a copout?

[Rock]

Biblical figures generally believed they would receive their rewards after this mortal life. This life is but just a blink of the eye. Can't you see the bigger picture???

As for JFK/RFK/Martin Luther King vs. Bush/Cheney/Blair, you don't know the whole story or real person. You just know what you've read or been told by the media. You've never even met any of them. You don't know their true heart or what really made them tick. So you are hardly a credible judge of who was good or bad or right or wrong.

Also, lots of Joe ordinaries get unlucky and suffer and/or die young. Read the news in a big metro area and you will see what I mean. Examine the lives of those who die young and you will see many seemed to have lived meaningless and unimportant lives of virtual invisibility.

There is no proof that good karma gives you a better next life that I'm aware of. There is also no really proof of heaven/hell. One or both may be true or false. There may be something on the other side of death. You will never know until you die and even then, you will only find out if there is a realm where you retain your memory and/or former consciousnesses. Its possible that the people who 'served their purpose here' get rewarded at some in-determinant time in the future (either in this life or after) and/or those who have failed 'their mission' get punished at some in-determinant time in the future (either in this life or after). But you just can't know, at least not now.

Reality is, you know about as much about the universe as a micro-organism knows about earth. The whole truth is likely way beyond the capacity of the human mind to comprehend. Come-on man, focus on the big picture.

[Winston]

True, but the bottom line is that good people do suffer and die young, and evil people prosper. So karma makes no sense in that regard.

I've seen RFK and MLK on TV and know what they stood for. They definitely were very good people with compassion and a desire to help others and make a difference. I am a very good judge of character. What they stood for is publicly known and on video in their own words. It's no mystery or rocket science.

Do you think Gandhi was a good man? If so, why would he get assassinated? Why didn't his good karma protect him? It doesn't make any sense, does it?

[Rock]

True, but the bottom line is that good people do suffer and die young, and evil people prosper. So karma makes no sense in that regard.

I've seen RFK and MLK on TV and know what they stood for. They definitely were very good people with compassion and a desire to help others and make a difference. I am a very good judge of character. What they stood for is publicly known and on video in their own words. It's no mystery or rocket science.

Do you think Gandhi was a good man? If so, why would he get assassinated? Why didn't his good karma protect him? It doesn't make any sense, does it?

I reckon its true that many good people have died young and many bad guys who've lived long lives. But the reverse is true as well. So you haven't proved any kind of relationship here. There are many very good people who live long and peaceful lives. I know some of them personally. And there are very evil people who die very young. I remember one real bad apple in my high school who didn't make it to 20.

As for standing for something, keep in mind, there are a lot of family value republicans who were later discovered to have some nasty skeletons in their closets. Many other so-called heroes who stand for something never have their evil sides discovered. And even for those whose actions were mostly clean, who really knows what evil, lurks in the hearts of men. How do you know JFK/RFK weren't in bed with ruthless mob bosses. You only have access to the tip of the iceberg. You will never know the full story, good or bad, on any of them. Your character judging skills are suspect at best. Look at some of your old vids in Russia and explain why you missed what was obvious to most others. I've heard you excuses before so don't accuse me of having amnesia again. Its just that your explanations don't hold any water IMO.

[AsiaBill]

Of course Karma and destiny do not always have positive outcomes; such is life as it's NOT a "bed of roses" nor do each of us live a perfect life withOUT causing pain and suffering to others whether it be on purpose or without even realizing it. Such "bad luck" or hardships in one's life can be "food for thought" and contemplation. Also such downturns can help energize and motivate us to persevere with our struggle and accept sometimes patience is golden. No matter how in a hurry we may be to accomplish some goal(s) we need to remind ourselves to take time and appreciate the small pleasures in life.

[MrPeabody]

First, mixing the concepts of "karma" and "destiny" leads to confusion. Karma is a law of nature that acts mechanically and thus no god is involved. In Buddhism, you are encouraged to only accept knowledge that you learn from your direct experience, including the concept of Karma. I have talked to monks personally, and they say you don't believe in reincarnation until you get into certain deep meditation states where you start remembering your past lives. I have never been in such a meditative state so I still remain skeptical. The West has developed science which is a way of proving truth in the objective world. However, meditation is a "subjective science" developed in the East, which also uses analysis and proves truth through subjective exploration of one's own mind. However, unlike science where the results are available to all, in meditation (subjective science) each individual must discover the truth for himself.

[Winston]

Rock, what do you mean they don't hold water? My people judging skills are not 100 percent accurate. No one's is. Why do you hold me to that standard? Are you 100 percent accurate? lol

I am right about my impressions of people over 90 percent of the time though. And that is darn good. Agreed?

How come you only remember my misses but not my hits? That is not fair or objective. You love to be pessimistic and not give credit where it's due, don't you?

I can give you numerous examples of where I was right about someone. But you don't care right? You just like to argue.

Look, I do not claim to be good at something if I'm not. I suck at basketball for instance, and I admit that. I do not claim to be good at it if I'm not. I would not claim to be good at something I wasn't, or have a high accuracy in something if I didn't. Sheesh. Have some respect for my honesty, will you? I claimed to be good at finding menu functions on cell phones, for instance, and I proved it by switching your phone message memory from SIM card to internal memory when you asked me to, even after the cell phone salesgirl couldn't do it, remember? Why don't you ever give people credit where it's due?

They were not excuses. I cannot read Russians like I can Americans. They are different. No one on my list saw anything that I didn't either. Everyone was fooled by certain people. No one is infallible and hindsight is 20/20.

Why doesn't that hold water to you? Can you explain logically and fairly?

I wasn't trying to prove a relationship. Only that karma is not always consistent and linear like people make it out to be. Don't you agree?

As to JFK and RFK no evidence has surfaced that they were in bed with the mafia. They did not like the mafia. The evidence demonstrates that. Why are you injecting that possibility? I could say the same about you, how do I know you're not associated with the mafia? lol Anyone can make random accusations but they don't mean anything without valid evidence.

All that was proven was that they were probably womanizers, at least JFK was. And that they might have had an affair with Marilyn Monroe.

But anyway, assuming that I am right about their character, how do you explain their karma and destiny? That's the key question. So stop nitpicking into irrelevant areas.

[Winston]

First, mixing the concepts of "karma" and "destiny" leads to confusion. Karma is a law of nature that acts mechanically and thus no god is involved. In Buddhism, you are encouraged to only accept knowledge that you learn from your direct experience, including the concept of Karma. I have talked to monks personally, and they say you don't believe in reincarnation until you get into certain deep meditation states where you start remembering your past lives. I have never been in such a meditative state so I still remain skeptical. The West has developed science which is a way of proving truth in the objective world. However, meditation is a "subjective science" developed in the East, which also uses analysis and proves truth through subjective exploration of one's own mind. However, unlike science where the results are available to all, in meditation (subjective science) each individual must discover the truth for himself.

But how do you explain karma and destiny in light of the examples I gave in the first post?

[MrPeabody]

First, mixing the concepts of "karma" and "destiny" leads to confusion. Karma is a law of nature that acts mechanically and thus no god is involved. In Buddhism, you are encouraged to only accept knowledge that you learn from your direct experience, including the concept of Karma. I have talked to monks personally, and they say you don't believe in reincarnation until you get into certain deep meditation states where you start remembering your past lives. I have never been in such a meditative state so I still remain skeptical. The West has developed science which is a way of proving truth in the objective world. However, meditation is a "subjective science" developed in the East, which also uses analysis and proves truth through subjective exploration of one's own mind. However, unlike science where the results are available to all, in meditation (subjective science) each individual must discover the truth for himself.

But how do you explain karma and destiny in light of the examples I gave in the first post?

I don't know. I have never experienced the deep meditative states that would give me an expansive enough view of reality beyond my own ego to be able to comprehend how the totality works. Do you really know how happy George Bush is or what may happen to him after he dies? I don't know either.

One more point on karma. When you really start getting into the theoretical aspect of Buddhist psychology, you finally realized that karma is actually similar to what Western psychology calls the "unconscious mind". Buddhism sees the mind as a mindstream (that is a process) and not an entity like the West. Thus, your past wholesome and unwholesome actions are stored and become your karma, whereas Western psychology would say that your experiences are stored in your unconscious mind. The latest in neurological research is starting to prove that the Buddhist process view of the mind may be a more useful approach than the Western entity view. Buddha is still light-years ahead of anything Western psychology has come up with.

[Winston]

First, mixing the concepts of "karma" and "destiny" leads to confusion. Karma is a law of nature that acts mechanically and thus no god is involved. In Buddhism, you are encouraged to only accept knowledge that you learn from your direct experience, including the concept of Karma. I have talked to monks personally, and they say you don't believe in reincarnation until you get into certain deep meditation states where you start remembering your past lives. I have never been in such a meditative state so I still remain skeptical. The West has developed science which is a way of proving truth in the objective world. However, meditation is a "subjective science" developed in the East, which also uses analysis and proves truth through subjective exploration of one's own mind. However, unlike science where the results are available to all, in meditation (subjective science) each individual must discover the truth for himself.

But how do you explain karma and destiny in light of the examples I gave in the first post?

I don't know. I have never experienced the deep meditative states that would give me an expansive enough view of reality beyond my own ego to be able to comprehend how the totality works. Do you really know how happy George Bush is or what may happen to him after he dies? I don't know either.

One more point on karma. When you really start getting into the theoretical aspect of Buddhist psychology, you finally realized that karma is actually similar to what Western psychology calls the "unconscious mind". Buddhism sees the mind as a mindstream (that is a process) and not an entity like the West. Thus, your past wholesome and unwholesome actions are stored and become your karma, whereas Western psychology would say that your experiences are stored in your unconscious mind. The latest in neurological research is starting to prove that the Buddhist process view of the mind may be a more useful approach than the Western entity view. Buddha is still light-years ahead of anything Western psychology has come up with.

That seems to be true. I've noticed that sometimes your subconscious mind will act out in ways that deliver your karma to you. That's happened to mine too. But when it does, I wonder if it's our conscience that's doing that?

If so, what about sociopaths who have no conscience? Does their subconscious karmic minds deliver them their karma?

The mindstream would also explain how telepathy works, which science can't explain.

[Rock]

Rock, what do you mean they don't hold water? My people judging skills are not 100 percent accurate. No one's is. Why do you hold me to that standard? Are you 100 percent accurate? lol

I am right about my impressions of people over 90 percent of the time though. And that is darn good. Agreed?

How come you only remember my misses but not my hits? That is not fair or objective. You love to be pessimistic and not give credit where it's due, don't you?

I can give you numerous examples of where I was right about someone. But you don't care right? You just like to argue.

They were not excuses. I cannot read Russians like I can Americans. They are different. No one on my list saw anything that I didn't either. Everyone was fooled by certain people.

I wasn't trying to prove a relationship. Only that karma is not always just and linear like people make it out to be. Don't you agree?

As to JFK and RFK no evidence has surfaced that they were in bed with the mafia. They did not like the mafia. The evidence demonstrates that. Why are you injecting that possibility? I could say the same about you, how do I know you're not associated with the mafia? lol Anyone can make random accusations but they don't mean anything without valid evidence.

All that was proven was that they were probably womanizers, at least JFK was.

But anyway, assuming that I am right about their character, how do you explain their karma and destiny? That's the key question. So stop nitpicking into irrelevant areas.

Different cases have different levels of complexity - from simple to extremely difficult/virtually impossible. Figuring-out definitively and correctly that a spic-and-span type celebrity hero is not hiding something just by watching them speak on TV and reading about them in mainstream media would generally take extremely sharp people reading skills. On the other hand, realizing that blond girl in the vid was playing you like a chump and had absolutely no affection or respect for you is immediately apparent to about any American viewer with the most basic common sense. Its not a Russian American understanding gap. Its a clear player-sucker scenario. If you make obvious mistakes in tic-tac-toe, how could you ever be good at chess? If you claim to be an expert people reader, you loose most of your credibility as soon as you make an obvious, common sense type of mistake. Some mistakes are understandable. But for a real expert, not this type of mistake.


JFK's father, Joe Kennedy made a fortune bootlegging according to some sources. Some of his family's mob sources may have helped him to get elected. And later, he may have ended-up pissing them off. Who knows the real truth. There are all kinds of conspiracy theories and conspiracy on conspiracy theories out there. Why don't you ask the expert, Odbo and see what he says? What evidence do you have that your assumptions - JFK was all good - are not entirely bogus? Why did he stand idle when his father had his sister lobotomized into a vegetative state? What do you make of the Bay of Pigs fiasco? And he and his brother sure dogged Marlyn Monroe, lol. I suppose Nixon was all bad too? You're thinking and assumptions are so black and white, good guys vs. bad guys, very childlike and naive.

Who am I to determine how just or injust so-called karma is? I only have an idea about my own personal reality. Other people, even those we get close to, will always have some mystery to us. Your base assumption seemed to be, good guys die early and suffer while the evil live long and thrive. My response to that was that being good or bad may be totally unrelated to how short or long a person lives. Examples are all over the map. Perhaps things happen more randomly than you'd like to believe. Perhaps you are looking for patterns where they don't exist. That's just our nature, to always search for patterns.

BTW, you're right, I very well be connected with a mafia or a violent gang. So you better be careful.

[Winston]

Rock,
Your memory is messed up again. I knew from the beginning that Katya was a user and gold digger and insincere. I knew she was playing me. It is even documented on my video tape on the night we were engaged. You want to see it? I can upload it to youtube. I admitted what she was about, on video, before she scammed me. It was obvious. My strategy from the beginning was to try to use her too, and get as much sex out of her as I could. But of course, she was stubborn and it wasn't as easy as I thought. That is what really happened. Nowhere did I think she was honest and sincere, and then get fooled. I believe I have explained this many times. So why do I have to explain it again? Are you having amnesia again? You seem to see what you want to see, not what I said.

I did not make such a blunder equivalent to tic tac toe. You claim that I did. I myself did not claim that. That is YOUR error, not mine. How come you never admit to errors when you make them? Isn't that typical male ego?

I did not misread Katya's intentions. I have misread people, but that is not an example. I misread certain other people like Vadim, whom no one warned me about after they saw his picture. I'm talking about the guy in this incident.

http://www.happierabroad.com/The_Privat ... e_Scam.htm

And I misread Yannis too in the Negotiator Scam.

http://www.happierabroad.com/The_Negotiator_Scam.htm

I also misread two people in the two professional robberies I witnessed in Moscow, though I did not even know them or interact with them.

http://www.happierabroad.com/2_Professi ... beries.htm

Those are real examples of cons I didn't see in advance. But the example you gave was not one of them. It's already been explained to you many times, yet you keep bringing it up. Why can't you update your beliefs to fit the data?

Also, you didn't answer my question. I could give you hundreds of examples of where my judgment/impression of people turned out to be true and accurate. But do you care? Will you factor them in and acknowledge them, or ignore them cause you only want to criticize and see faults in others (but never in yourself)?

I'm judging JFK by what he did in office, not by his family purity. He stood up against corruption and spoke out against secret societies. And he was opposed to the Vietnam War. The Bay of Pigs was run by the CIA, but Kennedy withdrew air support, and that's why the CIA might have held a grudge against him and wanted to assassinate him. Didn't you know that? Why are you trying to make it out to be like JFK was behind the Bay of Pigs?

Ok well if you say that being good or bad matters not in what happens to us, then you are agreeing with me that the classic definition of karma is inconsistent and not provable or observable. Right? If we agree, then why do you sound like you're arguing with me?

Well, for all you know, I could be part of the Illuminati. So you'd better be careful too. lol

But you're not exactly clean and square and free of "skeletons in the closet" either. You never give out your real name to anyone you meet, including me. And when you check into hotels, you use a fake name, a common first and last name, which I've seen you do. Why do you need to do that? Isn't that something a fugitive does? lol. Do clean and square people do that? I don't think so. You are obviously very intelligent and must have good reasons for what you do. Either you've been burned badly in the past and are paranoid, or you have something to hide or run away from. There is a very high probability of one of those being true. I am not infallible and I could be wrong, but the odds of you having something to hide based on those two things are very high, according to logic and common sense. Normal people with nothing to hide do not withhold their real name from everyone and go by a common name that is not their real name, and they do not use fake names to check into hotels either. You can't deny that.

But anyway, none of us are clean. We all have skeletons in the closet to some degree. And secrets that we don't want others to know as well.

Or do you claim to be clean with no secrets and nothing to hide?

You know, I would be glad to show you my first and last name in my passport. But I know that you would not show me yours. I think you told me before, that it is your policy never to show anyone your ID or your real name, out of privacy concerns, not even to your friends. Is there a logical reason for that? Or is it out of pure irrational paranoia?

Btw, this isn't about online privacy. Mr S never gives out his real name in this forum either, but offline I know his real name, cause he gives it out to people he knows offline in real life. He doesn't make it a policy to never give out his real name to anyone he knows offline.

[MrPeabody]

First, mixing the concepts of "karma" and "destiny" leads to confusion. Karma is a law of nature that acts mechanically and thus no god is involved. In Buddhism, you are encouraged to only accept knowledge that you learn from your direct experience, including the concept of Karma. I have talked to monks personally, and they say you don't believe in reincarnation until you get into certain deep meditation states where you start remembering your past lives. I have never been in such a meditative state so I still remain skeptical. The West has developed science which is a way of proving truth in the objective world. However, meditation is a "subjective science" developed in the East, which also uses analysis and proves truth through subjective exploration of one's own mind. However, unlike science where the results are available to all, in meditation (subjective science) each individual must discover the truth for himself.

But how do you explain karma and destiny in light of the examples I gave in the first post?

I don't know. I have never experienced the deep meditative states that would give me an expansive enough view of reality beyond my own ego to be able to comprehend how the totality works. Do you really know how happy George Bush is or what may happen to him after he dies? I don't know either.

One more point on karma. When you really start getting into the theoretical aspect of Buddhist psychology, you finally realized that karma is actually similar to what Western psychology calls the "unconscious mind". Buddhism sees the mind as a mindstream (that is a process) and not an entity like the West. Thus, your past wholesome and unwholesome actions are stored and become your karma, whereas Western psychology would say that your experiences are stored in your unconscious mind. The latest in neurological research is starting to prove that the Buddhist process view of the mind may be a more useful approach than the Western entity view. Buddha is still light-years ahead of anything Western psychology has come up with.

That seems to be true. I've noticed that sometimes your subconscious mind will act out in ways that deliver your karma to you. That's happened to mine too. But when it does, I wonder if it's our conscience that's doing that?

If so, what about sociopaths who have no conscience? Does their subconscious karmic minds deliver them their karma?

The mindstream would also explain how telepathy works, which science can't explain.

In Buddhist psychology, when you do an unwholesome action you create a sankhara ( a reaction, mental conditioning) which causes you suffering now and in the future. When you are in a mode of creating sankharas, they multiple, and cause you to do more unwholesome actions which leads to more sankharas, and you are in a viscous circle. The only way to break the chain and reverse the process is to meditate and condition your mind to a level of subtleness that you can just observe with equanimity the sankharas as they manifest as feelings on your body. Then they start going away. When you can stop generating sankharas, you reverse the process and reduce your misery. Buddhism doesn't really have a concept of conscience (although morality is considered essential for stabilizing your mind), but rather a concept of heightened awareness (which I think is much more broad). Buddha said there are four types of people - 1) those in darkness moving to darkness, 2) those in light moving to darkness, 3) those in darkness moving to light, and 4) those in light moving to light. Psychopaths are in darkness moving to darkness, so they are certainly suffering.

[Winston]

Also Rock,
You didn't answer something. Why do you never give out compliments? In the intro thread of the forum advisors here, I gave you a lot of compliments and highlighted your strengths and valuable qualities, and gave you credit where it was due. I was more than fair to you.

But you aren't fair to me in that manner. Why?

For instance, you can't even say that I am good at figuring out cell phone menus, even though I helped you find a function in yours that you couldn't and the cell phone sales lady couldn't, and a few days later I helped a German guy at the hotel change his phone menu from Chinese to German, even though I couldn't read any Chinese at all! So I am obviously good at that. Yet you won't acknowledge it or give credit where it's due.

A normal nice positive guy would have said, "Hey thanks Winston! You're pretty good at figuring out electronic stuff like this!" That's what a typical friendly nice Western guy would have said in that situation. But you're never that complimentary for some reason.

It seems that you are very biased toward looking for reasons to criticize me and down me instead. Are you aware of that? Why is that? Is it from the Chinese mentality in you? Why are you overly critical and unfair and never give compliments, even where it is due?

I get the impression that you strongly prefer nitpicking and downing me rather than giving any earned compliments or praises. And I don't think that's fair. I have given you many compliments where it was due. The intro to the advisors thread is just one example.

Isn't there something wrong with that? Or am I missing something?

[Rock]

But you're not exactly clean and square and free of "skeletons in the closet" either. You never give out your real name to anyone you meet, including me. And when you check into hotels, you use a fake name, a common first and last name, which I've seen you do. Why do you need to do that? Isn't that something a fugitive does? lol. Do clean and square people do that? I don't think so. You are obviously very intelligent and must have good reasons for what you do. Either you've been burned badly in the past and are paranoid, or you have something to hide or run away from. There is a very high probability of one of those being true. I am not infallible and I could be wrong, but the odds of you having something to hide based on those two things are very high, according to logic and common sense. Normal people with nothing to hide do not withhold their real name from everyone and go by a common name that is not their real name, and they do not use fake names to check into hotels either. You can't deny that.

But anyway, none of us are clean. We all have skeletons in the closet to some degree. And secrets that we don't want others to know as well.

Or do you claim to be clean and devoid of weaknesses, with no secrets and nothing to hide that is subject to criticism or condemnation?

You know, I would be glad to show you my first and last name in my passport. But I know that you would not show me yours. Is there a logical reason for that? Or is it out of pure irrational paranoia?

I never have denied "skeletons in my closet" nor claimed to be morally superior nor even morally average. So its not like I'm a hypocrite. I'm not one of those Fields Ave. braggarts.

I've traveled and stayed in many third world countries and have learned that its prudent and wise to remain as invisible or unknown as possible. Its kind of the opposite to your approach. I've been lucky but seen others who were too trusting ultimately get burned, one way or another. The expat communities in a lot hot-spots are fairly small, transparent, and exposed. Foreigners in a given place talk a lot and exchange gossip. One Colombian American I knew in Cali got too involved with the local community and ended up getting shot dead point blank in the head just 2 years ago in broad daylight, right in front of his daughter. I think he was just late on paying someone back a modest sum of money. He was easy for them to research and find cus he was a high profile character among the gringos. Haven't you ever been stalked by a girl before? Why do you think a certain person on this forum recently had to change his number and tends to avoid certain areas where he's more visible?

As for you showing me your first and last name on your passport, etc. What's the point? I've already seen so much more, right on this very forum. And as I've said before, your recklessness towards privacy may cause others around you to be hesitant about sharing personal info. Because your life is basically an ongoing online saga. And those in the background sometimes get unwittingly exposed. I bet if your former American gf ever finds out about your illustrated posts on her, she won't be happy to say the least. And I bet William Two Feather regrets his casual hostel chats with you with you too.