A "limited hangout" is used by Intelligence Organizations when a clandestine operation goes bad; or, a phoney cover story blows up. When discovered the Intelligence Organization volunteers some of the truth while still managing to withhold key and damaging facts in the case. The public is so intrigued by the new information it doesn't pursue the matter further. The new disclosures are sensational, but superficially so...
The public remains in the dark, and the guilty escape punishment.

[In this case Melanie Phillips uses the Kelly investigation, where an inquest is unlikely due to the lack of what is called a 'properly interested person' (which would need to be Mrs Kelly), to draw attention away from the Diana investigation, which, with its inquest pending, is potentially more damaging to key figures in the establishement. Her article comes at a time when it is obvious that a new coroner in the Diana case is to be specially selected for a cover-up. -- RT]

A Prime Example of the 'Limited Hangout'

by Rixon Stewart

July 24, 2006

[Melanie Phillips']....article [below] is what is known as a “limited hangout”. It admits that Dr Kelly’s death may not have been suicide but this is largely because Norman Baker’s dogged persistence has unearthed facts that simply cannot be refuted.

As a result to deny that Dr Kelly took his own life might soon be to invite accusations of wilful blindness. However, the objective of the “limited hangout” is to establish credibility and then use it to conceal even bigger crimes.

The articles writer's attempt to establish some semblance of credibility is undermined from the start, however. As Melanie Phillips quickly reveals herself to be the sort of journalist regularly used by Britain’s security establishment to do their dirty work.

Doing nothing more than regurgitating Norman Baker’s original revelations, which were already in the public domain anyway, she simply calls for a “full inquest” into this “disturbing mystery.” She reveals nothing new other than to say Dr Kelly’s “suicide” was “suspicious”.

Nonetheless, the give away comes in the opening sentences where she describes anyone who believes “Princess Diana was murdered by MI6” as a “conspiracy “theorist” and obviously not to be taken seriously. This, despite the fact that an ongoing inquiry into Princess Diana’s death, headed by the former head of the Metropolitan Police, Lord Stevens, has amassed a solid body of evidence that suggests Princess Diana was indeed murdered. While Lord Steven’s inquiry has been ongoing for months now, the rest of Britain’s press and the likes of Melanie Phillips have been conspicuously silent on an investigation of momentous import. With the notable exception of the Daily Express, the rest of Britain’s media has virtually ignored the £4 million inquiry.

Of course, that is not to say the David Kelly’s “suicide” is not significant. But even if it is revealed as murder it could still be blamed on the CIA or Mossad or even, as Melanie Phillips suggests, the “Iraqi secret service”.

Whoever might be named the fallout would be far less than if Britain’s Establishment were revealed as being behind Diana’s death. All of which may explain why Britain’s so-called “free press” and the likes of Melanie Phillips have ignored former MI6 officer Richard Tomlinson, his damming affidavit and attempts by the British Establishment to muzzle him.

So, breathing not a word about an investigation that could have historic ramifications, the likes of Melanie Phillips are essentially involved in a damage control exercise. Naturally Melanie Phillips may simply be doing the bidding of an editor or she may simply be unaware of the facts and ignorant. Either way the end result is the same.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=4860