Spying on Princess Diana
This is one of those tabloid stories that will get lots of play and spawn conspiracy theories: Diana was bugged by secret service in U.S.:
American intelligence agencies were bugging Princess Diana's telephone over her relationship with a US billionaire, the Mail's sister paper has learned.Evening Standard reports that she was even forced to abandon a planned holiday with her sons in the US with tycoon Teddy Forstmann on advice from secret services, who passed on their concerns to their British counterparts.
Both US and British intelligence then forced Diana to change her plans to stay with Mr Forstmann in the summer of 1997, saying it was too "dangerous" to take her sons there.
Instead the princess took the fateful decision to take a summer break with Harrods owner Mohamed Fayed. This ultimately led to her going to Paris with his son Dodi, where they died in a car crash.
The Evening Standard also understands that US secret services have a number of secret files on Diana and her closest associates that are held by the national security agency. The files, which include reports from foreign intelligence - thought to include MI5 and MI6 - come under both top secret and secret categories.The reports cannot be released because of "exceptionally grave damage to the national security". The documents on the princess seem to have arisen because of the company she kept rather than through any attempt to target her.
As reported, this is a very odd story. What would have been "dangerous" about vacationing with Teddy Forstmann in the Hamptons? Forstmann is a well-known businessman with no shady associations that I'm aware of. He later lost quite a bit of money and had legal troubles, but that was after the Princess Diana episode. Based on some very quick research, the only thing I've seen that could explain the intelligence agencies' interest in Forstmann is that he was a prominent Republican; in fact, he was the national co-chairman of George H. W. Bush’s 1992 campaign. Could this possibly explain the Clinton administration's reported interest in his relationship with Princess Diana?
What seems inexplicable here is the U.S. government's intervening in Diana's relationship with Forstmann. Why did our spy agencies tell British intelligence that it was "dangerous" for Diana to come to the United States to stay with Forstmann? She traveled to the U.S. on other occasions. What on earth could have been "dangerous" about the Hamptons in 1997?
It seems inconceivable that the Clinton administration would have intervened in Teddy Forstmann's social life simply because he was a prominent Republican. At this point, though, whatever else may have been going on is a mystery.
UPDATE: In the Forum, Bull Moose 777 offers a theory:
The Clinton Administration in fact had an insidious spy program—I think it was called Eschelon, but that may have been a different spying program—that also involved the UK and (to a lesser extent) Australia.The concept was: Since USA law seriously restricted US spy agencies from spying on US citizens, or wiretapping them, the Clinton Administration could have the Brits do it for them; and when something seemingly valuable turned up, the Brits would inform the US.
The USA naturally would reciprocate. The Brits also operate under legal restrictions re spying on British citizens, so as the US side of the bargain, the US would spy on, and tap phones of, British citizens; and if somehing seemingly valuable turned up, the US would inform the Brits.
Australia was also part of the program, apparently for their part of the world.
All of the above is fact, not speculation.
The speculative part is this: It would appear that the Queen & Prince Charles were extremely interested in what the post-divorce Diana was doing—Was that loose cannon Diana really going to marry and/or have a child by that Muslim raghead, Dodi Fayed?—so they asked the Brit spy agencies (MI5 & MI6) to keep any eye on Diana for them, and viola, Eschelon comes into play & the USA starts spying on, & wiretapping, Princess Diana, all (or mostly) for the benefit of Queen Elizabeth II & Prince Charles. (I say “mostly” because legit British national security interests could require some measures to minimize the potential for the kidnapping of the world-travelling Diana, mother of the future King of England.)
I think all of that is plausible, but it still doesn't address the oddest part of the story: the U.S. agencies' reportedly telling the Brits that Diana shouldn't stay in the Hamptons with Teddy Forstmann. She came to the U.S. in 1997, too; Michael Barone writes to say that he met her at Katharine Graham's house in the summer of 1997. So she was here, just not in the Hamptons. There has to be a story behind it.
UPDATE: An Army intelligence officer writes to say that BullMoose's theory that U.S. and allied agencies share intelligence to circumvent their respective legal limitations is untrue. They share intelligence, yes, but not for that purpose, so that BullMoose's explanation of why we were spying on Diana would not be correct.
There has been a lot of comment on this post; to join the conversation, go here.
