Tag Archives: Peter Wickham

Peter Wickham: Push pollster? Fraudster? Grenada election tests Wickham’s credibility

Peter_Wickham CADRES

Commentary claims some are labeling Peter Wickham a ‘Push Pollster’

“A push poll is an interactive marketing technique, most commonly employed during political campaigning, in which an individual or organisation attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll.

In a push poll, large numbers of respondents are contacted, and little or no effort is made to collect and analyze response data. Instead, the push poll is a form of telemarketing-based propaganda and rumour mongering, masquerading as a poll.

Push polls may rely on innuendo or knowledge gleaned from opposition research on an opponent. They are generally viewed as a form of negative campaigning. This tactic is commonly considered to undermine the democratic process as false or misleading information is provided about candidates.”

… from the New Today article Peter Wickham – Pollster or fraudster?

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under Grenada, Politics

Patrick Hoyos comes out in support of Peter Wickham, a WikiLeaks victim

Peter Wickham: An insider trapped by his job, torn by conscience

by Nevermind Kurt

Patrick Hoyos wrote an opinion piece at the Broad Street Journal that basically says Peter Wickham didn’t talk about anything hardly at all to the US Embassy, and if he did it wasn’t about any subject that everyone didn’t already know about. Hoyos also says that journalists should be very careful talking to foreign governments.

Hoyos is right on one count: it’s going to be a long time before journalists or anyone else talk freely with any government representative ever again. Journalists and others have always talked to diplomats for a variety of reasons: status, to further a personal or group agenda, to exchange information in the hopes of inside tips or simply for the scotch and steak.

“You can buy a ten-hour voice recorder built into a pen for a couple of hundred dollars at Amazon.com. The Americans probably hand them out like candy to their Embassy personnel.”

Shocking? Hardly…

Everybody knew that the conversations were reported and in this day probably secretly recorded – but they talked anyway and it was all fun and games until WikiLeaks. Now everybody is SHOCKED! SHOCKED I TELL YOU! that the US Embassy personnel actually prepare intelligence reports and conversation summaries and ship them home to Washington. Imagine that!

Don’t you think that Barbados diplomats file a few reports themselves out of New York, Beijing and London?

How far back do such diplomatic dealings go? Read your bible and go back from there to the cavemen. Embassy personnel submit reports on cocktail party conversations, chance meetings and private briefings. Always have, always will. Why the shock?

I think that Peter Wickham probably said exactly what the US Embassy reports attribute to him and I wouldn’t be surprised if tape recordings exist – not that any US diplomat will ever admit to them. You can buy a ten-hour voice recorder built into a pen for a couple of hundred dollars at Amazon.com. The Americans probably hand them out like candy to their Embassy personnel. If you were in the business of meeting with people and filing reports, why wouldn’t you always have one in your pocket? Get dressed in the morning, put on the watch and put the wallet and voice recording pen in the pocket – just like that.

Damage Control Strategy for everybody: Let’s all pretend it doesn’t matter

Patrick Hoyos is in damage-repair mode for his old friend Wickham and I won’t blame him for that, but the cow pies dropped by Hoyos and Wickham are pretty stinky indeed.

I want to point out that Wickham is reported to have relayed quite a bit of insider information to the US Embassy personnel and many of Wickham’s big revelations were NOT in the public knowledge at the time. Hoyos and Wickham himself conveniently ignore this.

Take, for instance, the May 22, 2008 cable where Wickham is reported as saying “In the last election the Chinese gave money to both of the major parties in Barbados, in order to assure continued recognition…”

I never heard that before in private conversation and I never heard it from the Barbadian news media. How about you?

Where did Wickham get that information? As a political insider, mover and shaker he probably received information directly from credible BLP and DLP sources. Of course the Chinese gave money to both parties, but Wickham spoke with an insider’s knowledge and authority.

Then we have the St. Vincent Unity Labour Party coming out in defense of Wickham – saying “We believe that Peter is being misrepresented in these matters…

What else did you expect politicians to say? “Leroy Paris bribed us with CLICO money just like Wickham said… and we flew in voters, fixed roofs and bought groceries to bribe the voters?”

No, the ULP had to say that Wickham was “misrepresented”, and then Hoyos followed up with his column saying everything was known by the public and it doesn’t matter anyway.

Nevermind blame – Let’s talk about the truth of what Wickham said or is alleged to have said

As Barbados Free Press reported in its Wickham-WikiLeaks articles, one of the big topics throughout the Wickham briefings was the unregulated foreign and domestic monies being poured into political campaigns in Barbados and throughout the Caribbean. Nobody gives big money for nothing. Leroy Parris and all the corrupt business people who fund politics with big money do so on a tit for tat basis.

Nobody gives a quarter million dollars to a political campaign without an agenda. Five hundred dollars, even a few thousand can be contributed because you believe in a candidate or a party – sure – but a hundred thousand dollars cash or fifty thousand dollars of biz jet services? That kind of “donation” expects and requires a payback from the elected politicians.

Peter Wickham: An insider trapped by his job, torn by conscience

I think I understand both Peter Wickhams. The first is, as Patrick Hoyos observes, the quintessential political insider: “In regional polling, there is just no organisation that can match Peter Wickhamʼs CADRES. I mean that sincerely, and I am sure his professional services will remain in high demand on the basis of their quality, despite the leaking of those embassy communications.”

The second Peter Wickham is another man with a conscience who knows that the vast amount of foreign and corporate monies flowing into our political parties have corrupted democracy, stolen from the people, and caused our elected representatives to stash money away in Switzerland as they vote contrary to national interests.

Peter Wickham is part of that system. His funds from political parties are supplied by those who have corrupted the system and undermined democracy.

One Peter Wickham took the political party’s dirty money – while the other Peter Wickham under pangs of conscience told the US Embassy officials about it. The CBC sacked Wickham because he betrayed the established system.

Wickham is no better or worse than any other Bajan who knows what’s going on, but still takes the dirty money, promises of jobs and other perks from the DLP or BLP in exchange for their vote and vocal support.

Campaign funding laws are long overdue, but as Doctor Duguid said in a moment of truthfulness: Bajan politicians will never pass that kind of legislation. More’s the pity.

6 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Ethics, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption

BREAKING HERE FIRST: More Peter Wickham CADRES secret US Embassy briefings

WikiLeaks reveal Peter Wickham in private briefings with US Embassy Political Officers, diplomats FOR YEARS

Feb 3, 2006, US Ambassador Mary Kramer: “Wickham has met periodically with Emboffs over the past several years to offer his views on a variety of issues.”

Sept 22, 2006, US Ambassador Mary Kramer: “Wickham… a credible source.”

Sept 22, 2006, US Ambassador Mary Kramer: “In a recent meeting with PolOff, Wickham assessed the current political situation in Barbados as generally favorable to the DLP.”

Nov 17, 2006, US Ambassador Mary Ourisman: “Peter Wickham, political scientist, pollster, and consultant to the SLP, said in a private conversation with PolOff (Political Officer) on September 15 “

May 22, 2008, US Ambassador Mary Ourisman: “In the last election the Chinese gave money to both of the major parties in Barbados, in order to assure continued recognition, (Wickham) added.”

Will Peter Wickham now ‘revise’ his previous Press Statement?

Sacked CBC Journalist Peter Wickham issued a CADRES Press Statement in response to our September 3, 2001 Exclusive story: BREAKING HERE FIRST: CBC sacks Peter Wickham over secret corruption briefings to US Ambassador.

In that CADRES Press Statement, Mr. Wickham issued a Clintonesque slippery denial – saying he never met privately with US Ambassador Mary Kramer.

Hey! Nobody ever said Wickham met privately with the US Ambassador, so why was that the subject of his press statement?

An anonymous reader thought they knew the reason and contributed Wickham’s Sticky Wicket – CADRES Press Statement wiggles and wobbles. The BFP reader noted some flaws and holes in Mr. Wickham’s explanation and denial.

Barbados Free Press crew finds more WikiLeak Secret Briefings!

Your BFP team spent the last 24 hours finding more WikiLeaks US Embassy cables naming Peter Wickham as the source in private briefings with US diplomats and US government personnel.

We’re still working away and there’s probably more left to find, but for now we present you with excerpts from what we have so far and the WikiLeaks links where we found the documents.

We’d like to hear from our readers, but our first impression is that Mr. Wickham has some explaining to do considering his Press Statement.

Now… be gentle folks. Like when President Clinton said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman…”, he really meant that moistening cigars in that way didn’t count as “sexual relations”. (Somehow I don’t think Shona would buy that line from me!)

We wonder… what did Peter Wickham really mean when he issued that CADRES Press Statement? Maybe he just meant to say that he never had sexual relations with the US Ambassador. Yes, that must have been what he meant! 🙂

WikiLeaks US Embassy Cables 2006 to 2008. Source: Peter Wickham >>>> Continue reading

31 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Ethics, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption

Wickham’s Sticky Wicket – CADRES Press Statement wiggles and wobbles

“Peter Wickham’s CADRES Press Statement wiggles all over the place and for me raises far more questions than it answers.”

“…if the “Emboffs” (US Embassy personnel) took copious notes and had their tape recorders rolling over “several years” of meetings, Mr. Wickham might find the truth to be very inconvenient.”

submitted by “Sticky Wicket” as a comment via anonymous proxy.

A very sticky wicket, indeed, for Mr. Wickham, for there are several things about his press statement that sound wiggly and don’t sound square at all at all, starting with his last sentence:

“I have already contacted a representative at the US Embassy and discussed my concerns extensively with her and she has advised that they cannot discuss the contents of these documents since there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.”

Mr. Wickham states that the US Embassy said they cannot discuss the contents of these documents (the Wikileak US Embassy cable dated February 3, 2006 that is the subject of the controversy.) because “there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.”

That sounds like either the Embassy is not forthright, or Mr. Wickham. I’ll take Wickham at his word that this is what the Embassy told him but Mr. Wickham would know that this statement by the Embassy is untrue. The Embassy would have an original of the cable. They sent it! The cable has a reference number.

The Embassy could instantly compare their original cable and the one released by Wikileaks and printed at BFP. Instantly.

Mr. Wickham is no dummy. He knows the Embassy could verify the accuracy of the WikiLeaks cable instantly, so why is Mr. Wickham talking foolishness “there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.” ???

Governments all over the world are commenting on WikiLeaked documents that concern them and not one of the WikiLeaked documents has been said to be false or changed by WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks source.

Foolishness for Mr. Wickham to repeat “there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.” as if he or anyone else accepts that as a valid reason for the US Embassy to not comment. Foolishness for Mr. Wickham to imply that there is some doubt that the WikiLeaks cable is an accurate copy of what Ambassador Kramer sent.

The second statement that doesn’t sound square is:

“Specifically, I can state categorically, that I have NEVER met privately with former US Ambassador Mary Kramer, who is alleged to be the author of this cable.”

Nowhere in the WikiLeaked cable does it say that Mr. Wickham met “privately” with Ambassador Kramer. Is this a straw man put up by Mr. Wickham as a proof that Ambassador Kramer’s report is false? Mr. Wickham could have met with the Ambassador in the company of other Embassy personnel, or the information could have come to Ambassador Kramer through other Embassy personnel who Mr. Wickham briefed.

Mr. Wickham states that he recalls Ambassador Kramer meeting with ten journalists, but he does not “categorically” state this was the ONLY time he met her. Read his Press Statement again. Mr. Wickham’s Press Statement has lots of wiggle room in it in many places. Read it again.

The WikiLeaks cable states that Mr. Wickham met with “Emboffs” (Embassy Officers, Officials, Operatives?) “over the past several years to offer his views on a variety of issues.”

That is “Emboffs” as in PLURAL. More than one. It could mean two. It could mean “MANY” over the “several years.”

Mr. Wickham would know how many different Emboffs he met with, who, where, when and how frequently “over the past several years”, but he seizes on Ambassador Kramer without explaining the “Emboff” meetings at all. He doesn’t deny meeting with the “Emboffs”. Instead, Wickham ignores this inconvenient information and, like a magician doing a trick, says “Look at this bright shiny Ambassador in my hand”, hoping that the audience will concentrate on Mary Kramer and forget about his years of meetings with “Emboffs”.

I presume that each of these “Emboffs” would have written an account of the conversations with Mr. Wickham. That is the standard practice of Embassy personnel from anywhere. Read a Tom Clancy novel or Ambassador Kramer’s own book to confirm that!

Ambassador Kramer quotes what she says are Peter Wickham’s exact words…

“When you have been cussed out by Ralph you have really been cussed at,” said Wickham.

“Vincentian ganja is a big thing” in the Caribbean, said Wickham…

Ambassador Kramer also makes general statements such as…

“Wickham believes the ruling party flew about 400 people to St. Vincent from the U.S. for the recent election.”

“According to Wickham, the largest amount of money came from Leroy Parris, Chairman of CLICO Holdings Limited, a Barbados-based insurance and real estate company.”

Marijuana growers have considerable influence in St. Vincent, where they are not necessarily considered undesirables but can be quite prominent people, according to Wickham. He thinks there is some truth to the rumors that that certain individuals tied to the drug trade provided funding to Gonsalves’s ULP…

The word for word quotes and certainty of Ambassador Kramer’s report makes one wonder if there were some hidden tape recorders rolling at these “Emboff” meetings held “over the past several years”, doesn’t it?

Mr. Wickham states he “sought legal advice on my options regarding these allegations”. One hopes that if he did not say what is alleged and quoted in Ambassador Kramer’s report, that the truth may come forth.

However, if the “Emboffs” took copious notes and had their tape recorders rolling over “several years” of meetings, Mr. Wickham might find the truth to be very inconvenient.

The Ambassador’s report was from 2006. How many “Emboff” meetings has Mr. Wickham attended since 2006? What did he say to US Diplomats since 2006 that we don’t know about?

Peter Wickham’s CADRES Press Statement wiggles all over the place and for me raises far more questions than it answers.

It is a bit of a “sticky wicket” for Mr. Wickham, isn’t it?

Further Reading

BFP: BREAKING HERE FIRST: CBC sacks Peter Wickham over secret corruption briefings to US Ambassador

BFP: Peter Wickham CADRES Press Statement

The Dominican: Wickham reveal details of corruption in DLP government to US Diplomats

6 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Crime & Law, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption

Peter Wickham CADRES Press Statement

CADRES PRESS STATEMENT

It has come to my attention that a “wikileaks” Cable which is currently being circulated and quoted in different electronic media has identified me (Peter W. Wickham) as the source of information which formed the basis of several improper allegations that were made regarding two current and one former Caribbean Prime Minister. I consider this a most disturbing turn of events which presents me, along with these gentlemen in a negative light and appears to be based largely on information that I have no knowledge of and never conveyed to the Ambassador Kramer.

Specifically, I can state categorically, that I have NEVER met privately with former US Ambassador Mary Kramer, who is alleged to be the author of this cable. I do recall her entertaining about ten journalists, along with myself in 2006 and at this meeting I made reference to an OAS Document that I co-authored entitled “From Grassroots to the Airwaves” which is in the public domain and makes general remarks about Caribbean political party financing concerns that I am well-known to have. I however did not, at that meeting or at any other time, discuss the intimate details of any specific campaign or concerns about any leader with Ambassador Kramer as is being suggested in the commentary on the cable, because I am not privy to such information.

It would also be misleading to suggest that I was a campaign advisor to either PMs Skeritt, Gonsalves or Anthony and that I knew of “backroom deals” sources of financing or any quid pro quo which is also being suggested. These are aspects of the campaign that I neither have nor ever had any knowledge of and therefore could not possibly have spoken to. I have therefore sought legal advice on my options regarding these allegations which can impact negatively on my professional reputation.

I have already contacted a representative at the US Embassy and discussed my concerns extensively with her and she has advised that they cannot discuss the contents of these documents since there is no certainty that the documents are authentic.

Peter W. Wickham

15 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption

BREAKING HERE FIRST: CBC sacks Peter Wickham over secret corruption briefings to US Ambassador

WikiLeaks “Confidential” US Embassy cable takes down Wickham

CADRES’ Peter Wickham revealed to US Diplomats: Campaign financing corruption, payoffs, “sweetheart deals”, political corruption by Leroy Parris & CLICO, drug money funding political campaigns, flying in of voters from USA.

“At the same time that Wickham was a political consultant, he provided secret briefings to US Embassy personnel about his clients’ activities. He’s finished. Who would hire him again?”

CBC senior executives “outraged”

Prime Minister Stuart said to be “beside himself” over CLICO / Leroy Parris revelations.

… CBC insider exclusive to Barbados Free Press

EXCLUSIVE to Barbados Free Press

(News media must attribute to “Barbados Free Press”)

The Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) sacked journalist and political analyst Peter Wickham on September 1st over the contents of a US Embassy cable released by WikiLeaks on August 30th, 2011.

A CBC insider tells only Barbados Free Press that the Barbados DLP government and CBC senior executives remain “outraged” after learning that Peter Wickham provided a series of secret briefings to US diplomats “over several years” where Mr. Wickham discussed and provided details about political corruption in the Caribbean. The briefings included information about the activities of clients and former clients.

Hitting the fan!

Barbados Prime Minister Freundel Stuart is said to be “beside himself” over the cable, which reveals among other facts that CLICO executive, former CBC Chairman and DLP supporter Leroy Parris provided large sums of under the table money to the Dominica DLP in exchange for business and a diplomatic passport. Barbados government members are concerned that the cable will provide more fodder for BLP Opposition calls for details on CLICO financial abuses and CLICO’s political funding of the Barbados DLP. (Editor: No kidding!)

“Wickham met periodically with Embassy Officers over the past several years”

The February 3, 2006 “CONFIDENTIAL” cable was sent by Mary Kramer, (then US Ambassador to Barbados and the Caribbean) and is published at the end of this post. The WikiLeaks cable references other US Embassy cables that are not included in the WikiLeaks releases – indicating that the United States State Department is in possession of additional information that remains secret.

The February 3, 2006 cable also contains Mr. Wickham’s assessment of Caribbean political funding.

Wickham’s assessment and information makes an excellent case for Campaign Financing and disclosure laws in Barbados…

“The amount of money spent on political campaigns in the Caribbean has increased with each election, according to Peter Wickham, a consultant who has worked for various governments and political parties throughout the region.

With no campaign finance laws or disclosure requirements present in most countries, political parties are free to accept funding from any source, including wealthy expatriates seeking to curry favor for their business and personal interests.”

Comment:  The increasing availability of campaign funds to Caribbean political leaders, combined with a lack of legal control over how the money is raised, makes for a troubling situation in a region where many turn a blind eye to corruption.

A few hundred thousand dollars, a pittance to a wealthy businessperson in Barbados or the Cayman Islands, could buy a great deal of influence in one of the small, economically troubled countries in the region.  Some of this influence may be purchased to further legitimate business concerns, but as in the case of marijuana growers, or even the bearers of passports to which they are not entitled, the influence could be used for more nefarious purposes.”

… US Ambassador Mary Kramer in WikiLeaked cable from US Embassy Barbados

Peter Wickham unaware of reason for sacking

Saturday’s Nation newspaper quotes Peter Wickham as not knowing why the CBC sacked him. According to BFP’s source, Wickham may not yet be aware of the reason for his firing.

Says Wickham to The Nation…

“No rationale was given… Needless to say, I am not pleased.”

“Where there’s a termination letter there’s always the impression conveyed that there was incompetence, misbehaviour, non-performance or underperformance, and I hope that’s not the belief that goes out there,”

Peter Wickham quoted in the Nation story CBC sacks Wickham

If Mr. Wickham wishes to comment on our story, we’d be pleased to publish whatever he emails us. Barbados Free Press published Peter Wickham’s writing during the 2007 election when the newspapers refused.

February 3, 2006 “CONFIDENTIAL” US Embassy cable from Mary Kramer, then US Ambassador to Barbados… Continue reading

64 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption