I'm not sure if you intended that sarcastically, but you certainly have written at great length about how someone you barely know is an ego-driven lying fanatic blackmailer seeking to enter some unknown social sphere.

I don't think a productive conversation will ensue between us.

Nox, I won't have time to answer you tonight. I should point out, though, that the word "hence" in that passage sets up a cause and effect relationship.

Good night, gentlemen.

Good points Nox.

Here I will try to repost why Simon says he is recluse.

Alright Gentlemen!
Perhaps if we wait to hear from Simon before we continue on with this. This thread is about BOOKS! Not moralizing on issues about journalism ethics! We(all) get it! Stay On Topic! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/butcher.gif)

A last comment, beg pardon.

Dan - you walked into a message board full of characteristically observant and intuitive individuals. Collectively, it's possible we DO know you better than yourself. Your intentions, your attitude, are made obvious through the way you express yourself. From your word choice to pattern of reaction that you exhibit. So far your conversational style is largely reactionary - one has only to look at when, how, and in what manner, you react, you determine why you react that way. And I may point out that so far, when confronted with a position you feel uncomfortable with, you tend to simply ignore/withdraw.

Nox - Easy solution is to just spend more time here. I manage to read all the new stuff, -and- engage in verbal foreplay. I just have to sacrifice a shower, grocery shopping, socializing.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

peace

p.s. That was totally a joke...

With respect given to our friend BYM that this is a semi locked topic. I have just listened to Simon's interview on coast to coast radio. Dan Harms calls in and Simon politely allows him to ask some questions. The interviewer rips into Dan pretty good.

Anyone who would like to listen to the interview private message me.


Peace

Hello All:
I just bought the 'Dead Names' yesterday and finished reading it today. A very interesting and engaging story of the birth of mystical societies and their rivalries in New York, full of interesting characters. Hard to think this only happened 30 years ago and seems removed from me by generations. (the whole sexual revolution, gay underworld, drug scene, occult scene, nothing I participated in or was touched by.. makes me feel like a baby)

I wholeheartly recommendit for the narrative value.

I also liked the additional info about the Toda in India and muslim tribes (I plan to read more about it).

On the whole I was struck by the difference in the writing style and the mind of Simon vs. the Necronomicon. Simon weaves and cuts when telling a story, goes on tangents at every opportunity, tries to explain and provide ramifications for the material, is overly analytical, and tries hard to explain things that possibly he doesn't understand himself. He sounds a lot like myself and my way of thinking, and in fact I really fear that I will no succeed in the path of Necronomicon because of it. I have a tendency to question everything and not to trust anyone or anything, the concept of complete faith and giving in onto some one elses's beliefs is alien to me. In this Simon and his writing style resonated with me.

I can see Simon writing the Necronomicon: The God of the Moon is the God Nanna (although the concept of Gods as blah blah bla) He is the father of the Zonei, the eldest of the wanderers (although as shown in the Magan text really the oldest is Tiamat, then Anu, then blah blah blah) The number Nannar is thirty (although Innanas is 15 that doesnt mean that she is his wife, in fact blahablah blah). In fact that is how the introduction comes across..

In contrast the Necronomicon as related by the mad arad is a single minded goal of putting enough information down before he dies, a complete an unquestioning faith in the gods and their powers and a self consistent text with few sidebars.

In my mind there is no way Simon could have written the Necronomicon, 'its not in his nature' (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

So what I get from both books, specially the 'Dead Names' is that I have 'come away with the certain knowledge that no matter what the Necronomicon is, or isn't, it is most definitely not a hoax'

Traveller.

P.S. Since starting posting in these forums I have always regretted that my email address (I'm sure that anyone can get hold off it) and my *.com site contain portions of my real name. It gives me the ibbie-jibies to think that a person in these magical forums (in which I am just a dabbler and looker) knows my real name, might get offended with one of my posts and knowing my name send me a real curse (I believe in the power of names, otherwise how are demos and angels called and controlled?). I just dont like the idea of disclosing who I am in this context and I fully appreciate Simon's desire to remain anonymous. So I woul just let the issue drop.