I was quoting from memory
Well your claim was still wrong or at least misleading. Syrians were indeed a part of the problem (apparently.)
you were selectively quoting from a news article that you had presumably read online. Do you see the difference? Also, two wrongs don't make a right and don't change the fact you were being deliberately selective.
That's nonsense. Just complete and utter nonsense. I don't have to quote the whole thing, or any particular part of it that
you think should be quoted. I wasn't being "deliberately selective". I linked to an article that anyone could read. What I quoted was a fair representation of the material. I wasn't quoting anything "out of context".
You were talking about "robbers" so I wasn't even focused on the issue of sexual assault. You are blaming me for not mentioning something when it wasn't even the issue you started talking about?
That's completely dishonest. You can't just pick something random out of a news story, and say, "well you didn't quote that part", "you are being deliberately selective". No, I didn't quote that part because it wasn't that relevant and I didn't need to quote it.
And the impression being given is that the trouble was started by the organised gangs- so "caused" by Syrians is deceptive and inaccurate.
Your original claim was misleading. It's as simple as that. And I said "part caused" which is to say, that some of them were involved.