"Torched car belonged to deceased Serb from Austria"

He got killed by Serbian terrorists stop put in a crocodile tears on your face we all know thet it’s sad thet his son have to grow up with out his dad I hope the person who did this will get cut and be punish the full extent of the law I’m Albanian and I never believed he killed ethnic Albanians in Kosovo Poor man got cut between 2 dirty politics Kosovo’s dirty politics and Serbian dirty politics I strongly believe Oliver was one of
Most democratic politician in whole of balkans I got chance to talk to him and it’s honored to speak to thet man R.I.P. Oliver Ipray to god to look after his family Amen 🙏

Good luck on finding the perpetrators. Shooting and hitting someone 6 times from moving vehicle with a pistol, boldly burning the vehicle immediately, the vehicle belonging to a deceased man, all these have the signature of trained security forces or proffesional killers.
Neither side has shortage of such men.
Politicians better calm down and let the police investigate before jumping to conclusions.

Then it can't belong to him
(1+1=2, 18 January 2018 20:47)

You’re the only one who used the word “belong”.

You obviously don’t understand the difference between “belong” and “belonged”.

You may wish to enroll in elementary English grammar to understand the difference between the present tense and past tense of verbs. The past tense (belonged) implies a previous action. That is unless you are stuck in 1+1=2 level of English grammar incomprehension and can’t understand verb tense.

Moreover, you may wish to read the primary source and quote to learn of the exact wording that was used in the native language.

Perhaps your next moniker should be 1 X 0 = 0

Good luck on finding the perpetrators. Shooting and hitting someone 6 times from moving vehicle with a pistol, boldly burning the vehicle immediately, the vehicle belonging to a deceased man, all these have the signature of trained security forces or proffesional killers.
Neither side has shortage of such men.
Politicians better calm down and let the police investigate before jumping to conclusions.
(Niko, 18 January 2018 16:08)

@ Niko - Well said, Niko!

"Torched car belonged to deceased Serb from Austria"

"This information is correct, we received it from the Austrian police. This vehicle was sold several times and we are trying to find out who was the last buyer," said the director of the Serbian police.

Here's a tip to mr director of the Serbian police: if you conclude the car _belonged_ to x then that person _is_ the last buyer.

How can a car belong to anyone other than the last buyer? Or maybe the car was previously owned by a Serb in Austria? Then it can't belong to him if it has been sold several times after that.

Pick a story and stick to it mr inspector Cluzö, I mean director of the Serbian police.

In the English language when we speak of a torched object ...we often speak in past tense, i.e:
car pre torch: belongs
car post torch: belonged
(1+1 = still 2, 19 January 2018 13:33)
—-

No “we” don’t.
“We”, who have studied the English language and who live in a civil society, understand that “torching” an object does not change its ownership.

“We” know that a
Wine barrel pre torch: belongs to the barrel maker
Wine barrel post torch: still belongs to the barrel maker

“We” know that a
Creme Brûlée pre torch: belongs to the chef/restaurant
Creme Brûlée post torch: still belongs to the chef/restaurant

A bill of sale may change the property status of a wine barrel, a Creme Brûlée or a car.

Perhaps in lawless chaos, such as the KiM dysfunctional fenced-in ghetto, illegitimate ownership changes upon arson, torching or other criminal activity. However, civil societies have a different convention regarding the property of objects. “We” are not surprised to learn that you believe “torching” changes ownership of an object.

I get it
(1+1 = still 2, 19 January 2018 13:33)

—-

Yes, We’ve unmasked the incompetence of your own words and we all “get it.”

@AY
Nice try but no cigar.

In the English language when we speak of a torched object (or a dead person to take another example) we often speak in past tense, i.e:

car pre torch: belongs
car post torch: belonged

person x:
pre death: belongs to y family
post death: belonged to y family

But it's understandable that you try to mask the incompetence of your motherland cops, I get it ;)

@AY
Let us entertain the idea that when "the director" said “torched car belonged to deceased Serb from Austria” he meant that the Serb from Austria was one of possibly many of the car’s previous owners. To illustrate let’s assume the car’s owners are (in chronological order): a, b, c, Austrian Serb, d, e, f.

Ownership of cars through time is normally stored in some kind of database. To find out that the car in the example above was once owned by an Austrian Serb you automatically get the information on who the car’s current owner is. From this we can deduct that it is as easy (or easier) to get the information of the last owner as is to get the information of one of the previous owners.

It may very well be as you’re maybe suggesting, i.e. that the car at one point _belonged_ to the Austrian Serb but _belongs_ to someone else now.
In this case “the director” is even more incompetent than we thought, by showing that somehow they were able to find who the car belonged to previously, but they don’t know who the car belongs to currently (which should be information you could get as easy or easier).

cont. from my previous post:

Alternatively, the scenario is as I believe, i.e. that your government is behind this, and in the strive to cover it up by fake scenarios they mix their stories up. The strange thing is that they don’t seem bothered by it. And why would they, I mean, clearly you took the bait, accidentally or consciously. And if we assume you represent the average Serbian citizen, it is no exaggeration to say that Serbs are delusional, i.e. you’re living in a lie, accidentally or consciously makes no difference.

And here you go mr AY, to proof my point, a bit sooner as expected, a new story from Serbian government:

https://www.b92.net/eng/news/crimes.php?yyyy=2018&mm=01&dd=19&nav_id=103308

O boy.. :)

Yes - I Think the Sinature NIKO hit the Nail !.

Arn.Sweden.

He got killed by Serbian terrorists stop put in a crocodile tears on your face we all know thet it’s sad thet his son have to grow up with out his dad I hope the person who did this will get cut and be punish the full extent of the law I’m Albanian and I never believed he killed ethnic Albanians in Kosovo Poor man got cut between 2 dirty politics Kosovo’s dirty politics and Serbian dirty politics I strongly believe Oliver was one of
Most democratic politician in whole of balkans I got chance to talk to him and it’s honored to speak to thet man R.I.P. Oliver Ipray to god to look after his family Amen 🙏

"Torched car belonged to deceased Serb from Austria"

"This information is correct, we received it from the Austrian police. This vehicle was sold several times and we are trying to find out who was the last buyer," said the director of the Serbian police.

Here's a tip to mr director of the Serbian police: if you conclude the car _belonged_ to x then that person _is_ the last buyer.

How can a car belong to anyone other than the last buyer? Or maybe the car was previously owned by a Serb in Austria? Then it can't belong to him if it has been sold several times after that.

Pick a story and stick to it mr inspector Cluzö, I mean director of the Serbian police.

@AY
Nice try but no cigar.

In the English language when we speak of a torched object (or a dead person to take another example) we often speak in past tense, i.e:

car pre torch: belongs
car post torch: belonged

person x:
pre death: belongs to y family
post death: belonged to y family

But it's understandable that you try to mask the incompetence of your motherland cops, I get it ;)

Good luck on finding the perpetrators. Shooting and hitting someone 6 times from moving vehicle with a pistol, boldly burning the vehicle immediately, the vehicle belonging to a deceased man, all these have the signature of trained security forces or proffesional killers.
Neither side has shortage of such men.
Politicians better calm down and let the police investigate before jumping to conclusions.

Good luck on finding the perpetrators. Shooting and hitting someone 6 times from moving vehicle with a pistol, boldly burning the vehicle immediately, the vehicle belonging to a deceased man, all these have the signature of trained security forces or proffesional killers.
Neither side has shortage of such men.
Politicians better calm down and let the police investigate before jumping to conclusions.
(Niko, 18 January 2018 16:08)

@ Niko - Well said, Niko!

@AY
Let us entertain the idea that when "the director" said “torched car belonged to deceased Serb from Austria” he meant that the Serb from Austria was one of possibly many of the car’s previous owners. To illustrate let’s assume the car’s owners are (in chronological order): a, b, c, Austrian Serb, d, e, f.

Ownership of cars through time is normally stored in some kind of database. To find out that the car in the example above was once owned by an Austrian Serb you automatically get the information on who the car’s current owner is. From this we can deduct that it is as easy (or easier) to get the information of the last owner as is to get the information of one of the previous owners.

It may very well be as you’re maybe suggesting, i.e. that the car at one point _belonged_ to the Austrian Serb but _belongs_ to someone else now.
In this case “the director” is even more incompetent than we thought, by showing that somehow they were able to find who the car belonged to previously, but they don’t know who the car belongs to currently (which should be information you could get as easy or easier).

cont. from my previous post:

Alternatively, the scenario is as I believe, i.e. that your government is behind this, and in the strive to cover it up by fake scenarios they mix their stories up. The strange thing is that they don’t seem bothered by it. And why would they, I mean, clearly you took the bait, accidentally or consciously. And if we assume you represent the average Serbian citizen, it is no exaggeration to say that Serbs are delusional, i.e. you’re living in a lie, accidentally or consciously makes no difference.

And here you go mr AY, to proof my point, a bit sooner as expected, a new story from Serbian government:

https://www.b92.net/eng/news/crimes.php?yyyy=2018&mm=01&dd=19&nav_id=103308

O boy.. :)

Then it can't belong to him
(1+1=2, 18 January 2018 20:47)

You’re the only one who used the word “belong”.

You obviously don’t understand the difference between “belong” and “belonged”.

You may wish to enroll in elementary English grammar to understand the difference between the present tense and past tense of verbs. The past tense (belonged) implies a previous action. That is unless you are stuck in 1+1=2 level of English grammar incomprehension and can’t understand verb tense.

Moreover, you may wish to read the primary source and quote to learn of the exact wording that was used in the native language.

Perhaps your next moniker should be 1 X 0 = 0

Yes - I Think the Sinature NIKO hit the Nail !.

Arn.Sweden.

In the English language when we speak of a torched object ...we often speak in past tense, i.e:
car pre torch: belongs
car post torch: belonged
(1+1 = still 2, 19 January 2018 13:33)
—-

No “we” don’t.
“We”, who have studied the English language and who live in a civil society, understand that “torching” an object does not change its ownership.

“We” know that a
Wine barrel pre torch: belongs to the barrel maker
Wine barrel post torch: still belongs to the barrel maker

“We” know that a
Creme Brûlée pre torch: belongs to the chef/restaurant
Creme Brûlée post torch: still belongs to the chef/restaurant

A bill of sale may change the property status of a wine barrel, a Creme Brûlée or a car.

Perhaps in lawless chaos, such as the KiM dysfunctional fenced-in ghetto, illegitimate ownership changes upon arson, torching or other criminal activity. However, civil societies have a different convention regarding the property of objects. “We” are not surprised to learn that you believe “torching” changes ownership of an object.

I get it
(1+1 = still 2, 19 January 2018 13:33)

—-

Yes, We’ve unmasked the incompetence of your own words and we all “get it.”