<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Advertising: consistently mistaking the evocative for the effective.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nazg.com/iqrai/index.php/2008/03/03/32/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nazg.com/iqrai/index.php/2008/03/03/32/</link>
	<description>Sliding down the banisters of the ivory tower.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 04:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Driller</title>
		<link>http://www.nazg.com/iqrai/index.php/2008/03/03/32/#comment-2096</link>
		<dc:creator>Driller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nazg.com/iqrai/index.php/2008/03/03/32/#comment-2096</guid>
		<description>As I website possessor I believe the content matter here is rattling wonderful, appreciate it for your hard work. You should keep it up forever! Best of luck. Consequently: thank you and please please go on with your good work. I'll surely come back and look for new input! Greetz</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I website possessor I believe the content matter here is rattling wonderful, appreciate it for your hard work. You should keep it up forever! Best of luck. Consequently: thank you and please please go on with your good work. I&#8217;ll surely come back and look for new input! Greetz</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Rodriques</title>
		<link>http://www.nazg.com/iqrai/index.php/2008/03/03/32/#comment-184</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Rodriques</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nazg.com/iqrai/index.php/2008/03/03/32/#comment-184</guid>
		<description>"A failure to recognize that recreational smoking exists"?  It seems to me that *any* kind of smoking, "recreational" or not, poses health risks not only to the smoker but to his or her companions.  So from a non-smoker's point of view, what possible benefit is there to making a distinction between "recreational" and "non-recreational" smoking?  How is this anything more than a nice rhetorical way for a smoker to justify his/her habit without admitting addiction and/or self-destruction?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;A failure to recognize that recreational smoking exists&#8221;?  It seems to me that *any* kind of smoking, &#8220;recreational&#8221; or not, poses health risks not only to the smoker but to his or her companions.  So from a non-smoker&#8217;s point of view, what possible benefit is there to making a distinction between &#8220;recreational&#8221; and &#8220;non-recreational&#8221; smoking?  How is this anything more than a nice rhetorical way for a smoker to justify his/her habit without admitting addiction and/or self-destruction?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

