New Book By Simon Options

I just wanted everyone to know there is a new book coming out by our old friend Simon. Yes the same author of the Necronomicon.

The title of the new book which is Dead Names : The Dark History of the Necronomicon has been out for awhile and it is still not released as of yet BUT they have finally released a picture of the book and a quick overview.

Here is the picture of the new book:

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/Frater_Nero/newbook.jpg)

and here is the Book Description:


The most feared, fascinating, and dangerous book in the history of humankind . . . Necronomicon

An ancient Arabic text -- a powerful book of spells that could, in the wrong hands, create unimaginable and irreversible devastation -- the Necronomicon featured prominently in the stories of legendary horror writer H.P. Lovecraft. For many generations, few believed it to be anything other than pure fiction.

But in 1972, a young man who, for his own protection, must be known simply as "Simon," stumbled upon an old, handwritten manuscript that ultimately proved to be an authentic edition of the unholy work.

Dead Names is the startling true account of the dark and violent history of this most fearsome of books: from its Middle Eastern origins to its reemergence centuries later; its role in pivotal events of the twentieth century, from the JFK assassination to the Son of Sam murders; and the terrible fates that befell those who helped bring the Necronomicon out of the shadows and into the light of day.

One of the most controversial topics in The Necronomicon Files is the Necronomicon's role in two murder cases. While we leave open the exact role that the book played in the crimes, we nonetheless suggest that it should be examined. Simon responds to us at a number of points, of which I have selected one:

Page 250:

Gonce focuses on the Necronomicon because it supports his thesis. He could have easily focused on The Witches Bible, The Satanic Bible, or even Queen of the Damned in the Ferrell case, and any one of a dozen satanic volumes available to Glen Mason, as books that contributed to the killers’ “murderous insanity.” The fact that both son and Ferrell were disturbed youths from broken homes with a history of antisocial acting out is ignored in favor the more sensationalistic claim that somehow the Necronomicon was responsible for their crimes. That the killers ignored the general themes of all of these books and instead ransacked them for anything that would fuel their own perverse delusions is mirrored in Gonce’s own approach when he singles out the Necronomicon when it comes time to point fingers and utter pious condemnations.

Based on Simon's reporting, our claim does seem ridiculous. That is because Simon doesn't tell you the whole story.

What Simon does not mention in his book is that, in both cases, the Necronomicon was singled out for attention. News reports and subsequent books indicate that both killers had a deep interest in the Necronomicon, and that both sought to open the Gates of Hell, or to call up subterranean demons, in exchange for personal power. All of this is a matter of public record, and is included in our book.

This concept - that power can be obtained by blood sacrifice that allows the Underworld access to the earth - is not something you'll find in The Lion King, or The Witches' Bible, or the other sources that these individuals owned and that Simon mentions as possible avenues. Further, unlike many of those sources, the Necronomicon is not presented as a work of fiction, but as an honest-to-goodness ancient text that provides the user with power, for good or for evil.

Sure, we could have dressed up a list of crimes where a copy of the Necronomicon was found in somebody's locker or room afterward, as Simon claims we did. We've got the data for that. In fact, we once had a reporter contact us about a case where the [/i]Necronomicon was owned by a perp. We looked at the facts and told him that we didn't think it was important. He never called us back. For the book we took two cases that we felt were relevant and discussed them, giving people room to consider the evidence for themselves.

Simon has had access to the same resources John and I have. If he claims that he doesn't believe the Necronomicon caused these crimes, he's free to express that opinion. If he wants to say that he's not responsible for the actions of deranged individuals, he can certainly say so. If he claims that most people who have the book don't commit such crimes, I'd agree with him. This board alone is proof of that. I find it odd that Simon can disclaim that the Necronomicon is linked to violence in Dead Names and hype its "role" in the Son of Sam killings and JFK's assassination on the back cover, but perhaps there's a good explanation for that.

Nonetheless, in Dead Names, Simon has not to include evidence given in The Necronomicon Files, evidence that might point to a possible motive for these crimes. Simon, I'd like to know why, given the amount of space devoted to the topic of the Necronomicon's danger, none of this is included.

[What Simon does not mention in his book is that, in both cases, the Necronomicon was singled out for attention. News reports and subsequent books indicate that both killers had a deep interest in the Necronomicon, and that both sought to open the Gates of Hell, or to call up subterranean demons, in exchange for personal power. All of this is a matter of public record, and is included in our book.]

What other books and sources, Dan? Where has it been expressly and explicitly mentioned that the Necronomicon was itself "singled out for attention" and by whom? The media or the perps themselves? As far as I can tell, the only ones who singled out the Necronomicon for attention were ...you and John.

[This concept - that power can be obtained by blood sacrifice that allows the Underworld access to the earth - is not something you'll find in The Lion King, or The Witches' Bible, or the other sources that these individuals owned and that Simon mentions as possible avenues. Further, unlike many of those sources, the Necronomicon is not presented as a work of fiction, but as an honest-to-goodness ancient text that provides the user with power, for good or for evil.]

The Necronomicon does not state "that power can be obtained by blood sacrifice that allows the Underworld access to the earth", thank you very much!

[Simon has had access to the same resources John and I have. If he claims that he doesn't believe the Necronomicon caused these crimes, he's free to express that opinion. If he wants to say that he's not responsible for the actions of deranged individuals, he can certainly say so. If he claims that most people who have the book don't commit such crimes, I'd agree with him.]

I do, and I have ... in Dead Names.

[This board alone is proof of that. I find it odd that Simon can disclaim that the Necronomicon is linked to violence in Dead Names and hype its "role" in the Son of Sam killings and JFK's assassination on the back cover, but perhaps there's a good explanation for that.]

The story of the Son of Sam case and the JFK assassination case is explained in the book; as is the fact that several of the principle personalities connected with the book died premature (and in some cases violent) deaths. But then, so did Jesus and many of his followers. And the defenders at Mosada. So did JFK. And RFK. And MLK. The fact of violent death may mean something other than "this book is evil" or "these teachings are evil". There is something deeper at work here, and anyone who grasps the entire thesis of Dead Names should be able to see that clearly. What I point out -- and, I think, quite clearly -- is that it is futile to make a case that somehow the Necronomicon was itself responsible for the crimes of Ferrell and the others when the evidence is so thin and so contaminated by other evidence. You focused on the one case you could actually use that actually mentions the Necronomicon in passing and blew it up into something ... other. So ... what are you saying, Dan? That the Necronomicon actually IS what Lovecraft purported it to be: a work of evil power? You guys want it both ways, it seems to me.

[Nonetheless, in Dead Names, Simon has not to include evidence given in The Necronomicon Files, evidence that might point to a possible motive for these crimes. Simon, I'd like to know why, given the amount of space devoted to the topic of the Necronomicon's danger, none of this is included.
[/quote]

I don't understand your question. I read the same book you did, the one on the so-called "Vampire Killers" (not the "Necronomicon Killers" by the way, which I think says it all) and it seems the motive, such as it was, was clear. What "evidence" did I miss in the Necronomicon Files?

You want to say that the Necronomicon is evil and somehow responsible -- a book, responsible -- for murder. You made that very clear in your book, forget the "let the readers make up their own mind" rhetoric. And then you say I am right when I say it can't be responsible for what some mentally-unbalanced person decides to do with it. Make up your mind. You can't have it both ways. "It's not logical, Captain." In any event, as I stated in Dead Names, there are crimes more hideous and more numerous committed every day by people who believe in the Bible, or the Quran. And there was a crime committed by someone who read John Fowles' "The Collector" ... where does it end, this blaming of books by people who want to remove responsibility from the criminals and put it between the covers of a book they don't like?