"Where is John Wayne when you need him?": Anti-Native Organizing and the “Caledonia Crisis”

Kate Milley

The Six Nations people of the Grand River Territory have been faced with a steadily increasing level of anti-Native organizing since they began the reclamation of the Douglas Creek Estates housing development in Caledonia in February 2006. This situation returned to the media spotlight in June 2009, when white Caledonia resident Doug Fleming announced his intention to form a militia to deal with ongoing “native lawlessness.”1 The group, ostensibly organized to uphold settler property rights and the Canadian Criminal Code, held its first meeting on June 23, 2009 to recruit volunteers. Claiming that the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) had failed to uphold the rule of law due to a “native appeasement policy” which produced a system of “two-tiered justice” and “racial policing” benefiting Natives, the Caledonia Militia announced its intention to enforce the law by carrying out citizen’s arrests of Indigenous people engaging in what they called “land claim terrorism.” Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the 61 people facing 178 criminal charges relating to recent Six Nations land struggles are Native, the Caledonia Militia hoped their strategy would encourage the OPP to make even more arrests. The formation of this white-settler militia thus represents a legitimization of and return to old-style vigilantism.

The group, in a classic Canadian colonial gesture, now renamed the Caledonia Peacekeepers, is only the newest incarnation of anti-Native organizing in and around this small, predominantly white-settler town in southwestern Ontario. The media spokesperson for the group, Gary McHale, is the leader of several other groups organized against Six Nations assertions of sovereignty, including Caledonia Wake Up Call (CWUC) and Canadian Advocates for Charter Equality (CANACE). McHale and his followers have organized townhall meetings, protest marches, and press conferences at Queens Park, and have on several occasions attempted to provoke the people of Six Nations by raising Canadian flags across from or on the reclamation site. Doug Fleming is active in McHale’s groups and also leads a campaign against “illegal smoke shacks” that have been set up by Native people on contested land in the region.

Although it is tempting to cast these organizations as fringe groups, it is important to note that thousands of people in the area have supported McHale’s meetings and campaigns. The October 2006 McHale-led “March for Freedom” brought out close to 1,000 participants. He also ran as an independent candidate in the last Ontario provincial election, receiving ten percent of the vote (4,800 ballots), and he won most of the polls in Caledonia and other areas where Six Nations protests have taken place. His events have been attended and promoted by self-proclaimed neo-Nazis, but they have also gained the support of mainstream elected officials. Haldimand County Mayor Marie Trainer, Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP) Toby Barrett, and new leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservatives Tim Hudack (who is proposing a new law to criminalize “illegal [read: Native] occupations”) have all been vocal supporters of McHale’s movement.

The first meeting of the Caledonia Militia was met by a counter protest of 200 mainly non-Native protesters, but, as a whole, the radical left has not taken this issue seriously. Rather than considering the grassroots anti-Native organizing of people like McHale as exceptional, it is necessary to contextualize CANACE, CWUC – and its newest incarnation, the Caledonia Militia/Peacekeepers – in a long history of anti-Native organizing and white backlash movements. A critical analysis of these groups makes clear that the dismissal of this violence is anchored in
discourses that deny Canadian colonial history and the pervasive racial logic that produces the ongoing dispossession of Native lands. Narratives that place responsibility for racism and colonialism exclusively on the shoulders of the rural white working class or on media-hungry “wackos,” as McHale has been described, serve to erase the widespread participation of white settlers in racist and colonial violence and to shore up the mainstream discourse of white denial and Canadian innocence.

Since CWUC and CANACE trade in far-right ideology, it is important to think about the ways in which “far-right” ideology, particularly with respect to Aboriginal peoples, is already embedded in the mainstream of Canadian law, politics, and everyday life. Understanding colonialism solely as a state-run practice works to make invisible the importance of “ordinary” white settlers in its organization, implementation, and maintenance. It is perhaps tempting to cast anti-Native groups as extremists, or to view them as having little or no relevance to most white Canadians. However, to do so is to belie connections between the common-sense understandings of everyday white settlers and the perspectives of self-described white nationalist or neo-Nazi groups. Canadian national narratives cast the blame and responsibility for racism and colonialism on the shoulders of a few “bad” white people – a false characterization that far too many left-wing white settlers accept. There is an urgent need for more research into anti-Native organizing and the ways in which white settlers mobilize, whether through action or inaction, to increase colonial violence aimed at derailing Indigenous self-determination.

When Native nations assert their rights, and particularly when they reclaim land, their actions often turn into spectacular colonial encounters with the Canadian state. Land reclamations are often surrounded by police and the military, but they are also regularly surrounded by angry mobs of white settlers ready to commit or provoke an increased level of violence. While white-settler organizing against Six Nations of the Grand River has taken on various forms, it finds cohesion in the colonial logic of genocide, which, as Andrea Smith explains, “holds that indigenous peoples must disappear. In fact, they must always be disappearing in order to allow non-indigenous peoples’ rightful claim over this land.”2 Indeed, “ordinary” genocide is rarely, if ever, about the complete physical annihilation of a group, but rather, involves the erasure of the group’s ability to exist as such. Sometimes named “cultural genocide,” this logic has long been at work in white settler violence against Indigenous self-determination.

This article is not an attempt to demonize Caledonians or those who participate in or support the events and groups described, nor is it an effort to render these actors innocent. Rather, my intention is to show that iterations of colonial violence are everyday and widespread. When I speak about white settlers, I include myself. I begin with the understanding that the white settlers I analyze are not so different from me, or those I love. I want to demonstrate that the moral distance is uncomfortably narrow between those who are easily cast in the category of white supremacist and those who comprise the majority of white Canadians. As white settlers on this land, we have a responsibility to respond to the continued colonial violence committed in our name.

The eruption of the “Caledonia Crisis”

After successfully resisting a raid by the OPP on April 20th, 2006, the people of Six Nations established highway blockades to defend the reclamation site. That same night, over 300 Caledonia residents gathered at the barricades demanding that the “Indians” be cleared from the land and that the “rule of law” be upheld. Part of one of the most well documented land claim disputes in Canadian history, the territory in question has been in unresolved “contest” for some 200 years. While the reclamation is an assertion of sovereignty and resistance against the ongoing erosion of the Six Nations land base, many Caledonians immediately cast it as criminal and “terrorist.”

Between April 20th and May 24th 2006, hundreds of local residents held weekly rallies against the Six Nations reclamation. They gathered around fire barrels chanting “Burn Natives burn.” They held signs reading, “Where is John Wayne when you need him?,” “Don’t feed the animals. Natives running rampant,” “Oka strike one, Ipperwash strike two, Caledonia Strike three,” and “What would George W. Bush do?” They demanded “military action now,” and some even pleaded for US military intervention. Local men expressed their desire to clear the land themselves, demanding that the OPP hand over their guns to “real men” who could get the job done.

While tensions eased after the removal of a highly contentious barricade on the town’s main street in June 2006, McHale, who at that time lived in Richmond Hill, a northern suburb of Toronto, began publishing a website called Caledonia Wake-Up Call (CWUC). Arguing that the OPP’s hands had been tied because of a governmental and police policy of “Native appeasement” brought on by the Ipperwash Inquiry, McHale organized a steadily growing movement to draw increased media and public attention to government and police “inaction” against what he called “Native lawlessness” and “land claim terrorism.” Thick with frontier imagery and genocidal desires to clear Indians from the land, these early rallies, coupled with McHale’s rhetoric, reveal the perpetuation of colonialism and colonial discourse in 21st century Canada.

The movement itself is organized around several websites and blogs, written and produced by its leading figures. McHale publishes WakeUpCaledonia.com, Mark Vandermaas is responsible for VoiceofCanada.com, and CaledoniaWakeupCall.wordpress.com hosts a blog written by Jeff Parkinson. Other key figures in the movement include Merlyn Kinrade, a lifetime resident of Caledonia, and MaryLou LaPratte, the former president of the Ontario Federation of Individual Rights and Equality (ONFIRE). ONFIRE is an anti-Native group that organized around Ipperwash and held rallies, for instance, in support of Kenneth Deane, the OPP officer who shot and killed Dudley George. Collectively, these individuals, led by McHale, are members of the Canadian Advocates for Charter Equality. CANACE is provincial and national in scope, and aims to work on “educational issues,” teaching other settlers how to mobilize effectively against Aboriginal assertions of sovereignty and land rights.

Similar to many anti-Native/sovereignty groups, CANACE is funded by private contributions of members and donors. Both Parkinson and McHale work full time for the group, indicating that it has a regular source of income. In addition to its educational platform, CANACE works to collect evidence on behalf of third parties, bringing charges against “native lawlessness” and organizing private prosecutions. It operates as a pseudo business, providing developers with information and resources on how to organize against Native claims to land. While they have focused on Caledonia, they have made inroads into other settler communities facing land disputes and have stated their explicit intention to organize elsewhere.

Although McHale and those who work with him consistently assert that they are not racist or motivated by racism, white supremacist leader Paul Fromm – best known for his support of holocaust denier Ernst Zundel – attended one of McHale’s events and has publicized McHale’s efforts on the neo-Nazi website Stormfront.org. Tellingly, in a discussion of the “Caledonia Crisis” on his nightly web show, Fromm utilized much of the same language and images as McHale. A post by “Canuck Rebel” on the Storm Front website explains in chilling clarity the appeal of the Caledonia Militia to white supremacists: “I live 20 minutes from where all of this is going on. I have been a proud supporter of Gary McHale and Doug Flemming [sic] for the past 3 years. I joined the Caledonia Militia because I believe it’s wrong what’s going on here.” McHale and his followers do not seem overly concerned by the possible presence of neo-Nazis in and around Caledonia who might be attracted to the prospect of physically confronting Natives, and have done little to actively address the fact that overt white supremacists find their message appealing.

Up until June 23, 2009, those working in solidarity with Six Nations have refrained from directly protesting McHale-led events. However, the threat of escalation and the dangerous precedent of a white settler militia prompted solidarity groups to mobilize. With fewer than four days notice, members of the CUPE 3903 First Nations Solidarity Working Group organized some 200 activists from around Southern Ontario to protest the first meeting of the Caledonia Militia. Although the June 23 protest was a success, the settler-left has not found a meaningful long-term response to the anti-Native organizing around Six Nations of the Grand River Territory. The hope that McHale will go away if ignored positions him and his efforts as somehow exceptional and personalizes the issue. Six Nations resistance has disrupted hundreds of millions of dollars in proposed developments, and as such it seems likely that developers will continue to support anti-Native groups focusing on issues of settler property rights.

Contextualizing Caledonia Wake-Up Call

Much like today’s policies, Canadian Indian policies of the past were embedded in and motivated by a general anti-Native settler sentiment. As Sarah Carter has argued, the proliferation of anti-Native propaganda in the 19th century worked to create a “spirit of national unity” in the face of a collectively imagined threat by its “cruel, treacherous, subhuman enemy.” Carter makes the point that although anti-Native sentiment was explicitly racist and imbued with colonial discourse, it was framed through nationalism. This is not surprising, for as many critical race scholars have shown, Canada is principally imagined as a white nation, and therefore Canadian nationalist expressions can easily take on a mandate to protect whiteness.3 Others, such as Elizabeth Furniss, argue that race is an inadequate analytic framework to contend with contemporary anti-sovereignty discourses, as these discourses draw “not on racist ideologies of hierarchical difference, but on the public ideal of equality.”4 Contemporary anti-Native groups draw on notions of equality and democracy, public ideals that have long played a significant role in justifying both colonialism and genocide. As David Bedford remarks, for Native people and nations, “being treated as equal Canadians amounts to cultural genocide.”5 At the heart of these discourses is assimilation, rooted in the quintessential colonial divide between civilization and savagery. As the Montana Human Rights Network describes, “The modern anti-Indian movement advocates the continued elimination [of Natives] not by the murder of individuals, but by the termination of their structures of self-governance, the taking of their resources, and by defining them as part of the ‘rest of the country’ through forced assimilation.” Cultural genocide, or genocide through forced equality, is a key to anti-Native mobilizations, and the denial of colonialism is therefore at its core.

“Political correctness” or “reverse” racism is at the very crux of CANACE organizing. Couched in the language of liberalism and rights-based discourses, the group describes itself on its website as “an organization for Canadians who want to lend their voice to one of the most important human rights struggles in our country’s history: the struggle to restore and preserve the rule of law and equality before the law for all citizens irrespective of race, religion, or national origin.” Claiming that a system of “two-tiered justice” exists in Canada that benefits Natives, the group depicts (white) settlers as oppressed by “racial policing” and Native extremism or “terrorism.” This grassroots movement relies on constructions of Native savagery infused with post-September 11, 2001 “war on terror” discourses. As Dean Neu and Richard Therrien insist, “This is a new improved language of colonialism, in a political climate where the worst accusation is one of anti-democracy, where terrorism lurks around every corner. The implication is that treaty rights are somehow undemocratic. It is the new nomenclature for what old-style colonialism called uncivilized and savage.”6

The centrality of race to anti-Native organizing should not be underestimated, for these are archetypical white “backlashes” against civil rights gains of the past fifty years. The anti-Indian movement has even been known to describe whites as an oppressed people victimized by “Red Apartheid.” CWUC and CANACE readily deploy the legacy of Martin Luther King against a “Native Supremacy Movement.” Despite their appropriation of King, it is not surprising that white supremacists support them given that their message is not far removed from that of other white backlash movements or Klu Klux Klan-style rhetoric. For instance, at the 2007 “Remember Us March,” organized by McHale and company, speakers sported white T-shirts boldly printed with the slogan “one law for all.” As the leader of the “new” KKK, David Duke popularized this very same slogan in the mid 1970s. Duke is often described as providing a new face for the Klan. He attempted to bring his message to the mainstream by explicitly advocating non-violence.7 In fact, the messages of this former KKK leader and of anti-Native organizations are virtually the same. A group similar to CWUC called Stop Treaty Abuse (STA) emerged in the late 1980s in Northern Wisconsin to organize against Chippewa spear-fishing rights. The STA held rallies and claimed to gain their inspiration from Martin Luther King and their mandate of equal rights for all. In 1990, Dean Crist, leader of the STA, commented that Duke “is saying the same stuff we have been saying… like he might have been reading it from STA literature.”8

The 1990s in Canada were marked by several high-profile standoffs, including Oka, Ipperwash, Burnt Church, and Gustafsen Lake. In British Columbia, the province recognized Indigenous rights to land for the first time during the final negotiations of the Nisaga’a Treaty. These benchmark decisions and highly visible instances of Indigenous resistance propelled a white-settler backlash and reinvigorated anti-Native/sovereignty activism. It was during this time that the slogan “one law for all” began widely circulating once again. The Canadian popularization of the term has been attributed to Mel Smith, author of the national bestseller Our Home or Native Land?, described as the bible for the Reform Party’s condemnation of treaty negotiations. In the preface he writes, “time is short – very short. The government of BC is determined to change us from a peace-loving democratic province, under the rule of law being equally applied to all, to a state where in large areas race counts for everything… Most of all, this book is a wake-up call to all Canadians.” The similarities between Smith’s and McHale’s messages are evident, and it seems likely that the latter is informed by the former’s ideas and populist brand of conservative activism. Both men foretell an unravelling of Canada, a transformation from a pacific country to a society on the verge of anarchy.

The Canadian Tax Payers Federation (CTPF), which runs a Centre for Aboriginal Policy Change, funded Smith’s book and has connections with McHale-led groups. The Caledonia Wake Up Call website maintains a prominent link to the CTPF’s petition to “End Canadian Apartheid.” Utilizing the seductive discourse of equality and democracy, the CTPF argues that reserves should be abolished so that First Nations can become equal Canadians before the law.9 However, such a measure would unilaterally erase any Aboriginal rights to land. It is therefore fundamentally a call for assimilation and cultural genocide. This assimilationist discourse, reminiscent of Trudeau’s 1969 White Paper, relies on notions of Canadian non-racism and commitment to “equality” to argue for the elimination of Aboriginal land rights.

The Mackenzie Institute is another right-wing think tank that both the CWUC and Voice of Canada websites advertise and provide web links to. In the mid 1990s, Tariq Hassan Gordon, a reporter for the Anti-Colonial Action Alliance, summarized the institute’s influence in shaping police and government policy responses to Aboriginal assertions of sovereignty:

In “The Legacy of Oka,” published by the Mackenzie Institute, it was suggested that the Army’s involvement at Oka gave the Warrior Society a moral victory in the eyes of the public. It was then recommended that the Canadian state hire, equip, and train police forces with the idea of using them as a counterinsurgency force to be used for any future confrontations with First Nations… The role and actions of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police during the standoff at Gustafsen Lake and the Ontario Provincial Police at Ipperwash Provincial Park last summer suggests that the recommendations of the Mackenzie Institute have been read by members of the government.10

The actions of federal and provincial police forces during the Gustafsen Lake and Ipperwash standoffs also seem to indicate the influence of the Mackenzie report. Anti-sovereignty mobilizations are anything but benign, and may have deep implications in the level and type of colonial force used against Aboriginal people and nations. Historically, anti-Native movements have worked to increase colonial violence by creating further justification for military or police raids, escalating tension and giving governments an excuse not to negotiate, proliferating anti-Native propaganda, and generally criminalizing claims to land and self-determination.

Responding to Anti-Native Movements

As assertions of sovereignty like those of the Six Nations of the Grand River gain more widespread public attention, the proliferation of anti-Native sentiment in Canada is growing and grassroots practices to quell First Nations resistance are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Given their savvy and fervor, the failure of the white left to intervene in the growing anti-Native sentiment in Caledonia has been “nothing short of scandalous” according to Tom Keefer in an article in Upping the Anti:

By failing to organize within the predominantly white communities surrounding Six Nations, the white left has effectively ceded this terrain to racist demagogues and allowed McHale and his cronies to speak unopposed on behalf of the “average hard-working, taxpaying, middle-class Canadian” of the area.

While non-native support was extensive behind the barricades of the reclamation site during heightened periods of tension, the failure of many white-settler solidarity activists to play a role in organizing against the growing wave of racist hysteria and violence within nearby white communities is indeed inexcusable. Keefer does note an exception to this trend, a group called Community Friends for Peace and Understanding with Six Nations. In response to early white rallies against the reclamation, “members of Community Friends decided to focus their activities on trying to defuse the racism and tension within Caledonia by directly engaging with people in Caledonia and seeking to build and connect pro-Native solidarity groups in surrounding non-Native communities.” Although Keefer describes this organizing as “important and… a step in the right direction,” such work “has been limited by the minimal institutional resources of the group and its short history of activity.”11

Keefer’s analysis underscores three key points. First, white settlers – even those who participate in anti-colonial resistance – can participate in and support ongoing colonialism, through action or inaction. Second, small, predominantly white towns like Caledonia do not have the infrastructure or experience of the organized anti-racist left in larger centres such as Toronto, Hamilton, or Guelph. Third, settlers can organize, educate, and mobilize other settlers to engage in anti-colonial resistance. As Keefer outlines, such organizing must be built around the “concrete instances and socio-political context of Indigenous-led and directed struggles.” He asserts that the focus on settler organizing does not diminish the primary role of Indigenous-led movements, but rather contends with the reality that the way “the non-Native majority of the population responds to Indigenous activism will have a major impact in shaping the success or failure of 21st-century anti-colonial resistance movements in the north of Turtle Island.”12

There is a long history of anti-Native organizing among white settlers, but a history of anti-colonial organizing also exists. As a response to the resurgence of anti-Native/sovereignty campaigns in the 1990s, many solidarity groups began to actively publish reports and scholarly research about the activities of anti-Native groups. Zoltán Grossman – a geographer active in the 1990s in solidarity groups that worked to create “unlikely alliances” between Native nations and white sport fishers in Wisconsin – writes about the strategies many of these groups adopted during an influx of anti-Indian propaganda and activism around assertions of Native fishing rights. Grossman notes that while perhaps counterintuitive, “the highest levels of cooperation often developed in the areas that had experienced the most intense resource conflict, where tribes had asserted their rights the strongest and the ensuing white ‘backlash’ had also been strong.”13

Building anti-racist and anti-colonial bases in white “border towns” is necessary, and is a strategy Grossman describes as historically successful. Even a small anti-racist foundation can make a huge difference in these situations. He explains how white sport fishers were moved away from the anti-Indian movement by reframing the issue and highlighting the common need to protect fisheries from mining companies. Educational work “to directly refute the false claims made by anti-Indian groups point-by-point” and fact-by-fact is also necessary. However, Grossman warns that “the ‘facts’ are there to fill more substantive needs; only by addressing those needs, and putting forth an entirely new framework for viewing the conflict, can we hope to erode the grassroots base of anti-Indian groups.”14 It is the salience of the colonial imaginary that allows these types of movements to operate. If we are to be effective, it is the framework of these colonial ideas that we must expose, and more importantly unlearn and undo, through anti-colonial and anti-racist education and grassroots organizing.

The creation and maintenance of a broad-based settler anti-colonial movement is required. As it stands, settler resistance against anti-Native groups is mostly localized and site-specific. It is important that such groups remain deeply rooted in, informed by, and answer to specific Indigenous-led resistance, but “Indian Crises” often emerge in “small border towns” that do not have the resources, experience and support or organizing capacity of the radical left in larger cities. Therefore, resources must be developed in order to support these community groups, and to share information and experiences between organizations doing similar kinds of work. Networks must be set up to track and expose anti-Native organizations so that when they appear in local communities a wealth of information, support and strategies exist to oppose them.

Colonialism has at its root a genocidal violence, and as white settlers, we participate in this violence by our mere presence on this land. Six Nations and other Indigenous nations organize their own people in anti-colonial resistance and it is imperative that white settlers look to their own and other white settler communities to do the same. We might begin by organizing to deconstruct the colonial imaginaries that are so evident in contemporary white-settler responses to Indigenous resistance, and to intervene in the violence impelled and propelled by these ideas. Rather than treating anti-Native leaders and organizations as exceptional, we must underline the pervasiveness with which Indigenous people are dehumanized and denied self-determined existence on this land. It is time we contend with ourselves, stop projecting our own responsibility and racism on others, and resist fallacies of progress that confine racism and colonialism to a distant past, or attribute them to our political enemies or to rural racism. Ironically, perhaps a re-appropriation of McHale’s “wake-up call” is in order. Frantz Fanon, after all, issued such a clarion to whites many decades ago. On decolonization, he wrote:

we are not so naïve as to think this will be achieved with the cooperation and goodwill of the European governments. This colossal task, which consists of reintroducing [hu]man[ity] into the world… will be achieved with the crucial help of the European masses who would do well to confess that they have often rallied behind the position of our common masters on colonial issues. In order to do this, the European masses must first of all decide to wake up, put on their thinking caps and stop playing the irresponsible game of Sleeping Beauty.15

Indeed, it is high time white settlers stop playing the irresponsible game of denial, wake up to the rule of our “common masters” and respond to the colonial violence done in our name against Indigenous peoples. The integrity of our own struggles and political accountability to Indigenous struggles demand nothing less.

Notes

1 Mark Vandermaas. “Caledonia Militia seeks volunteers to defend Haldimand property owners.” Voice of Canada. http://voiceofcanada.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/caledonia-militia-seeks-volunteers-to-defend-haldimand-property-owners/ (accessed September 15, 2009).

2 Andrea Smith, “Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of White Supremacy: Rethinking women of color organizing,” in Color of Violence : The Incite! Anthology. Ed. Incite! Women of Color Against Violence. (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2006), 68.

3 See for instance: Sherene Razack, Ed, “Introduction,” in Race, Space, and the Law: Unmapping a White Settler Society. (Toronto: Between the Lines, 2002).; Sunera Thobani, Exalted Subjects: Studies in the Making of Race and Nation in Canada. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007).

4 Elizabeth Mary Furniss, The Burden of History: Colonialism and the Frontier Myth in a Rural Canadian Community. (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1999), 27.

5 Bedford, David, The Tragedy of Progress: Marxism, Modernity and the Aboriginal Question.ed. Danielle Irving-Stephens. (Halifax, N.S.: Fernwood, 2001.)

6 Dean Neu and Richard Therrien, Accounting for Genocide: Canada’s Bureaucratic Assault on Aboriginal People. (London: Zed Books, 2003), 77.

7 Rebecca Statzel, Gazing into the Apartheid Conscience: What the White Nationalist Movement can Teach Us about the Reproduction of White Supremacy in America. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005), 458.

8 Zoltan Grossman, “Treaty Rights and Responding to Anti-Indian Activity,” Center for World Indigenous Studies http://cwis.org/fwdp/Americas/anti-ind.txt.

9 Canadian Tax Payers Federation, Apartheid - Canada’s Ugly Secret, Taxpayer.com (http://www.taxpayer.com/pdf/APARTHEID_Canadas_Ugly_Secret_April_2004.pdf.

10 Tariq Hassan Gordon, Mackenzie Institute: Police as Counterinsurgency Force, Anti-Colonial Action Alliance, http://sisis.nativeweb.org/ipperwash/sep96up.html (accessed January 19 2009).

11 Tom Keefer, “Contradictions of Canadian Colonialism: Non-Native Responses to the Six Nations Reclamation,” Forthcoming.

12 Ibid.

13 Ibid.

14 Zoltan Grossman, “Treaty Rights and Responding to Anti-Indian Activity,” Center for World Indigenous Studies, 1999, http://www.alphacdc.com/treaty/anti-indian.html.

15 Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, ed. Richard Philcox (New York: Grove Press, 2004), 61-62.