June 25, 2018
There is something fishy going on with these “pedos” and the police behavior towards them.
Check out this story.
Manchester police let a teenage boy stay in the house of a suspected paedophile and gangster for two hours in order to “protect an undercover investigation.”
During the 2011 ‘Nixon’ operation that was carried out to monitor suspect Dominic Noonan, police officers reportedly witnessed a 13-year-old boy walking into the paedophile’s house, but were told not to take any action by their superiors, the Times has revealed.
Police officers at the scene were concerned and asked senior staff how they could intervene. It was suggested that a local officer could come in under the pretext that they had received a public call. But that was not carried out.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) chose not to take legal action against the officer in charge, Dominic Sally, and his colleague, when the incident was first revealed to internal investigations by a whistleblower in 2014. On the contrary, Sally has since been promoted to the head of counterterrorism policing in northwest England.
One of the police officers that allowed the teenage boy to enter the criminal’s home claimed that he was later “haunted” by his decision not to intervene.
Dominic Noonan was found guilty of 13 cases of sexual assault in relation to young boys between the ages of 10 and 17.
“He used his notoriety to groom young vulnerable boys, then use them and sexually assault them until his behaviour became normalized” inspector Michael Gladwin told GMP’s Public Protection Investigation Unit earlier this month. Noonan was also previously convicted for robbery and firearm offences.
Early last year, the case was referred back to the IPCC. According to a spokeswoman for the force, a misconduct meeting was held in March last year, and the IPCC concluded that “both officers’ actions should be dealt with as a performance matter with appropriate action plans put in place.”
This is not the first time English police have come under fire for unprofessional conduct. Last year, Northumbria police paid a convicted child rapist £10,000 (US$13,200) to act as an undercover informant in their child sex abuse investigation. Back then, the IPCC concluded that there was no evidence of misconduct in relation to the case.
So the first question is why the police were investigating this guy. Clearly, it wasn’t to prevent his child abuse, because that seemed to be a secondary priority – otherwise, they would have had the smoking gun when that kid walked into his house and got raped, right?
“I’m gonna rape you.”
They were investigating him for something else, then. Something bigger than child rape, already a very serious crime.
While it was unmentioned in the article, it was almost certainly a Moslem that they were investigating. And also hinted at, but not specified, was the fact that he was probably a terrorist.
Many of these stories about “groomers” and “gangsters” and “thugs” who got in trouble for child rape don’t mention the Moslem angle. Or if they do, they don’t mention that a lot of these guys seemed to be under some sort of police protection.
“Police looked the other way,” should read, “police had a strange arrangement with these Moslems”.
I think that these are all MI5 assets.
Assets from the UK’s meddling in Moslem countries that have been resettled in the UK to be used at a later date as mercenaries and as an ideological wrecking crew in Syria, Libya, wherever they’re needed.
The guy was traveling to Libya and back
We’ve already heard many times about how many terrorists were “known” to the intelligence services of a given country. In fact, many seemed to travel a lot between their homeland and the West. But somehow, they remained free until the day of the attack.
How is this possible?
It makes sense if these were assets. And now the same connection should be drawn to the “grooming gangs.” I believe that the UK police is indeed poz’d and PC. But I also suspect that these are terrorist assets that are being kept around by MI5 or whoever and that’s why they’re given so much…leniency.
Somehow that is a more comforting thought than the possibility that the police is really that anti-White that they won’t confront child-rapists on account of their skin color.