Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla

by Ann Hansen

Direct Action chronicles the thrilling fast-paced action of the Guerrilla group that blew up the political activist scene of the 80's. Hansen and her Anarchist group Direct Action were responsible for numerous dramatic political acts, including the bombing of the Litton Systems plant in Toronto. After legal protest actions failed to stop Litton from making guidance systems for Cruise missiles, Direct Action defended the Earth, explosively. Additionally, Hansen with other radical feminists showed the Red Hot Video chain just how hot their illegal films depicting rape could become after being firebombed. Ann Hansen served seven years in prison and is now quite at home in Vancouver with her three horses, three dogs, one cat and a bird.

Genres: Memoir, Nonfiction, History, Politics, Activism, Anarchism, Feminism

512 pages, Paperback

First published September 21, 2001

Reviews

[Larry Bassett · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am not a terrorist. I am a person who feels a moral obligation to do all that is humanly possible to prevent the destruction of the earth.

In the Preface of Direct Action, a nonfiction work, author Ann Hansen explains:

During the late 1970s and early 1980s there was in Canada a large anarchist community that was particularly active in the prison abolition, feminist, Native, environmental, and Third World solidarity movements. While still working within these movements, some anarchists began to adopt direct action tactics that went beyond the legal boundaries defined by the state. They took up direct action not because they couldn’t control their rage, but as part of a long-term strategy to build a revolutionary movement that would be beyond the control of corporations and the state. An even smaller group within this movement decided to start a guerilla campaign – going underground to avoid possible arrest and imprisonment. I was part of a guerilla group that we called Direct Action.

I am a white male. I have always thought that if I had been born into a demographic other than the most privileged one, I would have had some conflicts as a result of rage at the discrimination that women and minorities had to accept daily. When I was most active as a community organizer working nonviolently to change the system, I thought that I would probably be dead if I had been born black. I would not have been able to accept the racist treatment heaped on blacks from birth. I would have been enraged, certainly not dedicated to nonviolence and probably would have sought out confrontation during those years when there was plenty of conflict. I was angry, but safe, in my most protected while male self.

So this book, Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla about violent direct action puts me in a place where I can imagine I might have found myself in my more radical days. But, instead, I was active in working for political change with the Ann Arbor Human Rights Party in the 1970s – change, not overthrow. I was working for tenant rights and welfare rights. Eventually I worked to organize people who refused to pay federal income taxes because more than half of those taxes went to the military. Nonviolent direct action with the emphasis on nonviolent. The pros and cons of civil disobedience – intentionally and publicly breaking the law with an acceptance of the legal consequences – are discussed as a part of setting the scene for our main characters who accept that civil disobedience is good for some as a part of the overall movement but not enough for them.

The author was eventually captured, prosecuted and convicted in connection with a bombing of a facility that made part of the cruise missile. Ironically, my mother was convicted of trespassing (crossing the line) during a nonviolent direct action at Williams International in southeast Michigan where parts for the Cruise missile were also made. She served some time in jail for that.

At the beginning of the book, I felt like a part of the establishment. The twenty-somethings were dumpster diving, eating in fancy restaurants and then leaving without paying the bill (“eat and run”) as well as illegal event postering and B&E to use a copy machine to print more posters. Would I want my twenty year old daughter doing things like that not to mention living in a derelict house in an “unsafe” part of town? It was easy to answer “No!” to that question. Our author, in her twenties, joined right in with the activities and found it exciting. It was clear that she would be a good urban guerrilla. I am sure I would have left post haste! It reminded me of one time applying to work and live in a Catholic Worker hospitality house. I was shown my “bedroom,” a cot in a corner under the stairs, and knew right away I was in the wrong place. Hansen told enough of her growing up story to suggest how she was ready material to become an urban radical.

You probably already know that the way the military prepares people (mostly men) to kill is by dehumanizing the enemy. This book goes in the other direction. It humanizes people whom you would probably otherwise not like. Terrorists rarely get good press. In Direct Action we meet the 1980s version of idealistic dedicated twenty something terrorists. They are presented as human beings – troubled in some ways – but human. Young adults who liked the adrenaline of doing dangerous, risky things from shoplifting to support themselves to planting 550 pounds of dynamite to try to slow down the production of cruise missiles. The people in the book are Canadian and the book is set in Canada, in Vancouver, British Columbia and Toronto, Ontario.

Direct Action takes place in the very early 1980s. However the book was written twenty years later. To the extent that it tells the stories of five young adults and the law enforcement that tracked them down, the book has a timeless quality. The “bad guys” are captured and imprisoned; the author writes the book after she is released from prison. Direct Action tells a lot about the motivation of the terrorists, a motivation that is still current: wanting to take more than symbolic action, knowing that their direct action alone will not change things, but hoping to encourage a growing number of people to seek revolutionary change through militant actions. But they are far from suicide bombers. They take precautions to assure that no one is hurt or killed as a result of their actions. But they are not always successful with those precautions and innocent people are occasionally killed or hurt. If you have ever felt powerless in seeking social change, you might be able to understand why they resort to dangerous, illegal actions. They want to break through complacency, jar people into an increased awareness of what they consider to be serious societal ills. They are environmentalists who do not fit the mold but see the earth being destroyed inexorably.

You will get to know the five "terrorists," Ann, Brent, Gerry, Julie, and Doug, individually. They are not cookie cutter duplicates. They struggle with how and what they are doing. They are criminals and, at the same time, they are not criminals. The goal of the author is not for you to like them, but for you to gain some understanding of why and how they did what they did.

Compared to where Direct Action ended as militant bombers, they started at a much lower key:

We ardently believed that we were helping people and the environment by spending our days trying to change it radically. We accepted welfare as the least we were owed for our efforts and suffered not pangs of conscience in supplementing our meager incomes by looting and pillaging Vancouver’s various capitalist enterprises. As modern-day Robin Hoods, we plundered the large food and department stores for food and clothing, freeing us up for what we saw as more important missions such as organizing benefits, rallies, and support groups for the various victims of our society.

They were a group of five young white people who learned to be criminals:

Reflecting our middle-class backgrounds, Doug, Brent and I used books and libraries as resources for learning criminal skills – as opposed to the real-life resources of other criminals.
. . .
We began to lay down our plans with great excitement, analyzing every aspect of the future robbery as if it were a topic for a doctorial thesis.
. . .
The environmental destruction I saw all around me was compelling me to commit my life toward doing whatever I could to stop it.

Our twenty-somethings worked on learning to become revolutionaries:

”I know,” agreed Brent. “We were born at the wrong time and place in history for what we want to do.” We had talked about all of this many times before – and especially how militant movements had to start somewhere. “I’m sure even in the Third World, the first liberation movements didn’t have many people in support,” Brent said. “It takes a long time for political movements to develop.” None of us were under any illusion that we were part of some huge revolutionary movement. Instead we believed that we were simply trying to inject militancy into a movement that already existed, and we hoped we would help it grow.

The process of obtaining supplies, including dynamite, for their first major action against a substation for a high voltage line is followed along to a successful conclusion. The effort of law enforcement to bring the perpetrators to justice is also described from the view of the lawmen. All this is written in a very readable style by the author who had access to police and court records to supplement her knowledge.

The bombing of a Litton facility, a part of the cruise missile manufacturing process, in Toronto is the signature action of the book.

A newsreader announced that there had been a bombing at the Litton plant. The next picture showed a fleet of ambulances arriving at the plant, their emergency lights turning, sending a bright red light across what seemed like a war torn landscape. A reporter appeared on the screen, standing in front of a huge crater with smoke billowing out of it. Behind the crater stood the shell of a building with a huge gaping hole bombed out of it. Thick steel support cables were dangling out of huge slabs of concrete that had been violently torn apart. But worst of all – especially from our point of view – was the sight of stretchers with bodies covered in white sheets being carried to waiting ambulances.
. . .
Julie was crying and Brent stared at the TV in profound disbelief. How could our plans have gone so horribly wrong? “we’ll have to flee to the United States,” concluded Brent in a hushed tone of voice. “No,” I assured him. “I’m going to kill myself. I can’t face this. These people. We didn’t mean to kill anyone, and I certainly wouldn’t be able to stand up in a court now and feel politically righteous about this action.”

Ten people were injured. No one was killed. It reminds me of a bombing at an ROTC building in Ann Arbor during Vietnam that killed a maintenance person who was not supposed to be in the building. Unintended consequences.

The Direct Action group, composed of two women and three men, was labeled as a terrorist organization by the law enforcement of Canada. Ann Hansen does not accept the label of terrorist. In her statement to the court (included in the book as well as communiqués about several other militant actions) at her sentencing:

I am called a terrorist – one who tries the impose their will through force and intimidation – by the court and press. But I am not a terrorist. I am a person who feels a moral obligation to do all that is humanly possible to prevent the destruction of the earth. Businesses such as a Litton, B.C. Hydro and Red Hot Video are the real terrorists. They are guilty of crimes against humanity and the earth, yet they are free to carry on their illegal activities while those who resist and those who are their victims remain in prison. How do we, who have no armies, weapons, power or money, stop these criminals before they destroy the earth?

I believe if there is any hope for the future, it lies in our struggle.

I am a natural consumer of a book like this as someone who has considered himself a radical at several points in my life. It is not written in technical language. It is readable and understandable even if you do not agree with the approach that says illegal destruction of property that presents a danger to humanity is not only moral but necessary.

The people in Direct Action are Canadian and the events actually happened in Canada in the years 1980-1983. The author was a part of the group and participated in many illegal, militant actions described in the book. She (and the other members of the group) were apprehended and convicted and served time in prison. She wrote the book in the several years just before 9/11/2001.

This book poses “unresolved ethical dilemmas” for me, dilemmas that I have struggled with for much of my life. The book get four stars from me for raising those issues one more time and in a very challenging and moving way. At almost 500 pages, this is a long book that I rarely wanted to stop reading.

[Ryan Mishap · Rating 5 out of 5]

Direct Action by Ann Hansen: I was led to believe by a couple reviews I read that this book would be a dry, academic account undermining the subtitle “Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla” with political rationalizations and sectarian posturing. Holy shit, not at all! This book is amazing on more than one level. Written novel-like, it is completely absorbing. The early 80’s in Vancouver, B.C., Canada: a few like-minded anarchists decide to prepare for going underground and becoming urban guerrillas attacking the capitalist/government infrastructure. While wishing to avoid being vanguardist, they hoped to carry out actions and help introduce the idea of revolutionary action in North America, as revolutionary movements were happening in the so-called Third World. Hansen was one of the members of their group Direct Action, and she starts the book by recounting the day they were all arrested, as they went to the mountains for target practice. The tension here is a good device to place the reader in a different mood/mind-set before she starts from the beginning. Hansen chose to write a narrative in a novel-like structure and even fictionalize certain aspects—mainly by creating a composite police investigator to provide a counter-point protagonist. While this choice could be criticized, I think she did the right thing as the book is easy to read and essential facts are unchanged.
Weapons practice, stealing cars and dynamite, fake ID’s, and sabotage against a powerline and a company that manufactured guidance systems for U.S. nukes (this action caused numerous injuries and the resulting feelings, news stories, and effects on above-ground groups is detailed): all this heady stuff could easily be romanticized and the mistakes and injuries could be glossed over, etc. Hansen doesn’t do this because she, like most anarchists, cares and has compassion. It isn’t just the narrative structure of a novel, then, that prevents romanticizing, as all the “characters” involved are treated as humans: from the paranoia, worry, and second-doubts of the group to the people injured to the cops and security guards. I couldn’t stop reading this book, and had to pause every now and again to remind myself that they actually did this stuff. It was real. That said, this isn’t a vainglorious account or superficial rationalization of what they did wrong. The depth of thought and introspection she provides counterbalances any romanticizing of the direct action.
This also isn’t a recantation of her anarchist beliefs. It’s an emotional, mostly honest account of people who gave a fuck and were moved to try and do something about the screwed-up world we live in. Please keep in mind, while reading this, that some of the shit they got away with would be close to impossible in our current computerized, security-control society. Caught now, or in the U.S., I doubt she’d have “only” served seven years in prison.
The most important aspects of this book, aside from the well-written personal tale, are the discussions that the group members have amongst each other and with others—such as native people. Through the background information on why they chose to become urban guerrillas, to the information on why their targets were chosen (porno stores, in the case of the Wimmin’s Brigade) to their personal discussion over reasons, history, current reality, and beliefs: this is also a political primer on the way our societies are structured and how they operate. Given the group’s activities and commitment, these conversations have an urgency to them that many a dry essay cannot match.
One of the conversations that comes up repeatedly, as the group talked over guerrilla movements, was how revolutionaries require a large base of support in the general population in order to be effective. Recognizing that they lacked this support in North America—a common nationality responding to colonialism, a common politic or ideology amongst a large swath of people—they decided to still carry on in the hopes they’d spark a debate and get more people to commit to radical, direct action against environmental destruction, capitalism, etc. This didn’t happen.
Seems to me, that most people who call themselves revolutionaries today—or encourage revolutionary action— aren’t talking about this need for a base of support in the general population. Or even in their own communities or scenes. Some anarchists or revolutionary-types will even stifle debate on the topic or refuse to even acknowledge its existence. It strikes me as pre-mature to call for revolutionary (dangerous) action when there is no support. the noble anarchist striking a blow against the vast machine of oppression has a certain romantic appeal, but, in real life, sacrificing one’s life or relative freedom hardly seems beneficial. I think that anyone calling themselves a revolutionary in North America today needs a firm understanding of the political, social, and cultural mainstream, its history, and the varying levels of people’s beliefs and realities. There needs to be an ongoing discussion in anarchist/revolutionary circles about the effectiveness of militant direct action versus creating and supporting the kind of communities we like to see. It is very easy to spout off some tough sounding shit, and very hard to make meaningful connections with other people—especially with people who believe differently. Direct Action took the guerrilla road seriously, but with no roots in community, they died on the vine. It is pretty clear that anarchists don’t have enough support and sympathy in the general population. We can’t even keep people out of jail, so it strikes me as irresponsible to puff up militant action with no possibility of backing and support.
Another interesting aspect of the book is the presence of punk rock. While two members of the group were punks, they weren’t part of the initial core. For those three, whose coming of age pre-dated punk, the scene was seen as a rambunctious outlet for disaffected kids. They attended shows, but didn’t look at punk rock as being a potential revolutionary movement.
There’s this tension in punk rock overall, involving aims, ideas, hopes, and practice: is punk rock a revolutionary movement for liberation, nihilistic rage, a community of outsiders, a sub-culture, or a mix of everything? You know the answer! The criticism often floats around, coming from anarchists, other radicals and some punks themselves, that punk is a failed revolutionary movement. Looking solely at the more anarchist and political scenes of punk (by no means a clear majority), I think that the criticism is valid. given the revolutionary rhetoric and militant exhortations of many bands and individuals, punk has not lived up to its lofty ideals and calls for action. Of course, this could be said about most anarchist groups active today.
I think it is a mistake to look at punk as a revolutionary movement. It is too diverse, so the anarchist and revolution stuff is but a part of the whole. As an anarchist punk, it has taken me a while to let go of my experience and hopes as the ones that should represent punk as a whole. That is, measured by the rhetoric of revolutionary punk, punk has failed. taken as an aggregate whole, punk is doing just fine, thank you.
Interviewing a couple local bands, one of the members said something about how there are only so many misfits and fuck-ups in any group of humans. Punk is a place for those freaks who don’t fit in and find punk a place to be, a community. Whatever form that takes, essentially, there are only so many people who will find worth and motivation within punk. A revolutionary movement has to rely on cross-group support; that is, commonality, or, as history shows more prominently, on identities, beliefs, and shared oppression shared by large numbers of a population. Since punk doesn’t have this commonality, to call it a revolutionary movement is to elevate it into a vanguard position, if I can use that tired concept again. Punk isn’t a national or cultural identity, nor a religion, and attempts to delineate a shared oppression with larger populations (class, environmental, etc.) haven’t exactly been successful. The majority of people aren’t interested in our music, styles, and politics. Quite simply, people aren’t going to be convinced to join.
Punks can form our own communities and collectively or individually be a part of various communities or coalitions, but punk can’t be a revolutionary movement by itself. That’s the wrong way to look at it. Punk can’t be that movement because of all those things certain anarchists and others complain about: our looks, our focus on music and the scene, and our often sneering rejection of the “normals”. Rather than a movement, I think of punk as communities where the freaks and the marginalized can find acceptance and support each other as people who don’t fit in the mainstream—or the larger culture or any of its minorities. Building and strengthening our punk communities can only help us navigate the shit in the world while hopefully allowing us to connect with other people who with we do have some shared values. that is, we’re not trying to convert others to our cause, we’re who we are and doing what we do. Our politics and actions may resonate with and mirror other group’s and that means we can work together for common goals, but we shouldn’t have to give up who we are to do this. Free communities of like-minded people each working together—or not—respectfully, is the ultimate goal of anarchy, I think, so building and supporting our punk communities is a positive action.

[Mary · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this on the bookshelf at Autumn Leaves. I rarely buy books; I more often go to the library. But the title caught me, and reading the back cover, and learning that these folks did an action at Litton in the 1980's, I was hooked, because I have personal friends who were doing nonviolent actions at Litton in the 1980's. And I'm intrigued by people who live "underground."
The lives written about in this book have similarities to what I read in Bill Ayers' book about the Weather Underground.
So these people's lives were very intense. They took their political role very seriously and wished that they lived in a country where there was more revolutionary understanding like Central America at the time. They lived in Canada and felt very alone in their politics. While all true, the book is written almost in the style of a novel, which makes it very readable. They carried out several actions which were violence against property, and she goes into a lot of detail about how they actually did that. She also talks about life on a day to day basis. They weren't as scrupulous about going undetected as the Weather Undergound, which is how they eventually got caught.
They did go to Toronto and bomb the Litton building, which was making cruise missiles at the time. They did end up injuring people, about which they were horrified.
What really shocked me though was that they did armed robbery in order to raise money to do their political actions and continue their "lifestyle."
What I wonder, and do also with Bill Ayers, is what they are doing now, but also how they make sense of what they did then vis a vis how they live now. Do they believe they've "sold out" now?

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a surprisingly well written book that mostly reads like a novel. Significantly, author Ann Hansen is thoughtful and honest. She assesses the impact of her groups bombings on the organizations that have targeted the same sites for protests, and found that while those groups did not endorse the bombings they pointed out the real criminals. This led to increases in the number of people involved in anti-military actions in Toronto after the Litton bombing.

To me, it seems the Direct Action group learned from the mistakes of both Weather Underground and Red Army Faction.

[Michael Schmidt · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Heart of a Gun: A review of Ann Hansen, Direct Action: Memoirs of an Urban Guerrilla

If I was to start talking to you about the Canadian anarchist guerrilla movement, you’d go “The what?” because in the modern era, outside of the separatist actions of the Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ) over 1963-1970, and the armed Mohawk resistance over 1989-1990, Canada has not proven to be fertile ground for guerrilla movements.
But, like the Swedish anarchist guerrilla woman I interviewed a few years back, such a movement, however marginal and forgotten, did once exist, and in this day of increasing anarchist militancy in the North Atlantic world – even if a Black Bloc is a poor shadow of the armed struggle underway in the Rojava Revolution – is becoming relevant again, especially for the political and ethical lessons it provides.
Ann Hansen’s detailed memoirs of her migration from a nature-loving farm-girl to an armed urban guerrilla completely at home with automatic weaponry, who was finally given life imprisonment for her pains, makes for intriguing reading.
The heart of this heavily dialogue-driven book is the ethical conundrums facing militant anarchists in the developed West where conditions have seldom been conducive to guerrilla actions. Frustrated by a “democratic” government that built mega hydroelectric projects, collaborated on guidance systems for US cruise missiles, and allowed the public sale of violent misogynous pornography, with its ears completely deaf to the reasonable pleas of the affected communities, Hansen and a small group of friends formed a guerrilla cell called Direct Action in 1982.
Enervated by a trip to Germany in which she had made friends among the outer support rings of the Rote Armee Fraktion (RAF), and inspired by the then-current insurgency of the Sandanista rebels in Nicaragua, Hansen and her partner Brent Taylor were clearly the intellectual leaders of the cell, which also included former punk bassist Gerry Hannah of The Subhumans, his 20-year-old girlfriend Julie Belmas, and an anarchist loner, Doug Stewart.
Much of Hansen’s book is dedicated to the complex interpersonal relations of the group and a heartfelt yet unflinching self-interrogation of the stresses and contradictions imposed on their friendships and politics by having to live clandestinely, shoplifting food to survive, and stealing vehicles and identities to stay undetected, and gear, dynamite and weapons for their actions.
For example, after two years of living underground, and having already bombed the turbines of a hydroelectric line and the Litton cruise missile works in Toronto – which mistakenly resulted in several severe injuries to staff – and firebombing a chain of video porn stores, she writes: “The side-effects of our unhealthy social isolation were beginning to surface. There weren’t enough social outlets for our emotions, and we didn’t have other friends who could act as sounding boards for our ideas and behaviour. If I had doubts about what we were doing, I could only share them with the converted – us. This situation of not being accountable or responsible to anyone was leading to questionable political decisions.”
This is the crux of the matter when it comes to anarcho-insurrectionism: can it truly act as a raiser of popular consciousness and a catalyst of combined action by the masses, or is it self-isolating and ultimately socially unsanctioned and so politically irresponsible behaviour?
While I recognise insurrectionism as an important minority strain within the anarchist movement with much historical legitimacy depending on the objective circumstances within which groups operated, there are vast differences between full-scale anarchist armies like the 110,000-strong Revolutionary Insurgent Army of the Ukraine (RPAU) defending a free zone of some 2-million people and yet submitting itself to the decisions of plenaries of peasants, workers and insurgents (in much the same way as today’s Zapatistas submit their guerrilla forces to civilian oversight), and the precipitate action of a tiny isolated group.
A far more fair comparison, however, would be between Direct Action and the militant actions of a similarly small group, like the Algerian section of the Mouvement Libertaire du Nord Africain (MLNA) over 1954-1957; but the MLNA was fighting in a liberation war against a French ultra-right colonial regime, whereas nowhere near similarly threatening conditions obtained in Canada in the early 1980s.
In some respects, Direct Action were nevertheless a child of their time, forming at the tail end of a series of anarchist armed groups in the shadow of the late Cold War that distinguished themselves from the RAF and other Marxist-Leninist guerrilla movements of the time: Resistencia Libertaria of Argentina, the Angry Brigade of Britain, the Komando Autonomo Antikapitalistak (KAA) of Basque Country, early Action Directe (AD) of France, the pan-European tendency fighting the Spanish dictatorship that culminated in the Groups of International Revolutionary Action (GARI), and Organización Popular Revolucionaria - 33 Orientales (OPR-33) of Uruguay.
Hansen is hard on herself for her decisions, especially those that resulted in the injuring of 10 people in the Litton bombing – and the negative impact on the youngest of the cell, Julie Belmas. Belmas conducted her own defence, diverged from their unified political line during her trial (this is not mentioned by Hansen), was sentenced to 20 years, and is reported to be busy writing her own biography. Hansen has adequately soul-searched and performed her mea culpa where necessary – but also in the book and in subsequent talks, she has maintained the necessity for militant direct action.
Though over-long, Hansen’s testimony is remarkable for its believable reconstruction of long-past dialogue and emotion, including those of the police on the guerrillas’ tail: at least the latter chapters of conversation obviously derives from transcripts of the bugs police planted in the cell’s homes.
It is a valuable exposition of the transformation of anarchist youth in a formally “democratic” yet actually unyielding and uncaring political environment, a trajectory that so many of my own generation started out on so long ago, from late Cold War punk rockers to serious anarchist revolutionaries – with the difference that she went on to engage in armed struggle.
It was not a step taken lightly, and she paid a heavy price (she wound up spending eight years in prison) for relatively small political gains. I respect both her honesty and her actions because armed struggle – preferably in defence of a mass movement of the oppressed classes – remains a necessary anarchist option against the callous anti-societies of neo-liberalism and neo-fascism.
As former GARI guerrilla Ariane Gransac Sedori told me a few years ago while cooking up a delicious dinner in her kitchen, “The only thing I love more than armed struggle is this!” and she punched her index finger forward in the air, indicating how she would switch off the unreal and false world offered by capitalist television.

[Karlie · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an important piece of British Columbian and Canadian history. As a graduate of the BC public school system, we were never taught about any part of the events of this book. I had never heard of the Chekeye-Dunsmuir bombing, the Litton Bombing, or the firebombing of Red Hot Video locations on the lower mainland. And it's no surprise that the state would avoid educating us on this matter, or even allowing a classroom discussion about it.

The best thing this book has going for it is the honesty. Hansen is always clear about how she was feeling, what her motivations were and how other people responded or reacted. There's one point where she is wondering if Julie, a younger member, fully understands the consequences of doing an action. Hansen also does Julie the service of giving Julie's feelings and response a space to exist( Julie feels fully capable, and that perhaps Hansen is being "mothery" or "patronizing") , and never tries to belittle or deny the emotions or thoughts of other participants.

Most people who commit acts of propaganda by the deed don't last long enough to explain why they felt they had to act the way they did. Hansens sober perspective on the Canadian government forces all of us to examine our government, our society, and its faults. It also allows one the opportunity to critique the anarchist/antifascist movement in Canada.

One of the most important things I observed from this book was that there was not enough public awareness or support to justify the bombing of C-D and Litton. Yes there were plenty of people who didn't want Chekeye-Dunsmuir damn built and they protested peacefully. There were people who didn't want Litton manufacturing cruise missile control pieces for the Americans and they protested too. But the peaceful protestors were acting within the system, which only allows peaceful, non-direct protesting. They had not (and still haven't) developed the understanding that you can't reform our Canadian system, you have to smash it. They still thought they needed to ask for permission-they were not yet sufficiently angered or aware enough of their options to support a bombing. And that was the problem right from the start: The people of Canada are not aware enough. We lack class consciousness, we lack the understanding that the struggles of the environment, equal rights for all genders and minorities, the economic crisis, animal rights-it's all connected. It's all the same struggle against the same overbearing system. Hansen, like many brilliant people, was born way ahead of her time.

[Kersplebedeb · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is an accessible, easy to read account of life in the guerilla by a woman who made that choice, being part of Direct Action, who once they got busted were known as the Vancouver Five.

When i was a kid in high school we had "Free the Five" posters up one the walls. Everyone thought they were super-cool, even though everyone had different ideas about what they had done and why. But as kids, we grasped how special it was that someone had done something!

Now over twenty years later, i appreciate Hansen's book for what it is. Sure, she doesn't provide tons of worldwide context about imperialism, she doesn't explain communist or anarchist theory in great detail, this is neither political theory nor polemic. But that is very much its strength, as this book is something you can give to someone sympathetic-but-not-activist, with a gut-level radicalism, and methinks they will "get it".

[Cristina DiChiera · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book needs some SERIOUS editing. I could have been done with it ages ago if she didn't include every minute detail of EVERYTHING as well as attemtping to tell the story from the perspective of multiple characters. But it's a fascinating insider's look into the limits that some will go to for what they believe in. It also provides the opportunity to consider the conundrum of individuals who are all good people who come from different perspectives who all think they are fighting for what is right but end up fighting against each other. I might finish reading it in a year or so.

[Lukas · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the amazing story from Ann's perspective of a group of Canadian guerilla activists. I saw the movie about the "Squamish Five" at the impressionable age of 14/15 and then I met Ann in the Prison for Women in the next year or so. I've always been curious about what it takes/does to a person to engage in such radical activism. She tackles their story with no hold-backs and tells how she went from a decent middle class girl to a woman serving a prison sentence for participating in the bombing of a munitions factory in Ontario.

[Bart · Rating 4 out of 5]

Direct Action is an in depth memoir of Ann Hansen's radicalization and participation in two guerrilla groups - Direct Action and Wimmin's Fire Brigade. I found the minutiae and analysis in all but the last hundred pages (these being somewhat boring) very intriguing. Unfortunately, Hansen omits some very real and unexpected ramifications of the Wimmin's Fire Brigade's "success" in drawing attention to pornography. Not only were their actions a catalyst in the Canadian government declaring porn depicting violence against women as obscene, but also unintentionally queer porn.

[Spicy T AKA Mr. Tea · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very interesting read and one that opened me up to the potential of an armed revolutionary faction of the left. The book gives an extremely fair analysis from Ann Hansen, one of the Squamish 5, of what it means to be an urban guerrilla in a conservative culture with little connection to the outside after committing acts of destruction. There is a heaping plate full of experiential knowledge to draw on if one intends to take their activism to more extreme levels. It was a quick and exciting read.

[Tentatively, Convenience · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well.. I respect Ann Hansen & her cohorts & it was good to read this bk BUT I just ain't down w/ bombings - whether they're done by the government or by radicals. Hansen is honest about their foibles & 'fesses up to the unintentional damage done to Litton Systems employees. Nonetheless, if I had to choose between Hansen & the government, it wd be a no-brainer in favor of DIRECT ACTION.

[Dr. Toxic · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting biographical tale of a group who participated in direct actions throughout Canada in the 70's. They got caught. It's interesting how the author writes about how she knows she was in the wrong for participating with these actions, but then goes into some detail on how and what they did. Very educational.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really interesting book on a group of Urban Guerrillas from Vancouver who commited bombings, fires and other related acts. Those who like the Subhumans (Vancouver-Canada) Gerry Hannah (aka Gerry Useless) the bass player for the Subhumans was involved in the group. They were called the Squamish 5 or the Vancouver 5 by some news papers.

[Chuck · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although it was longer than it should have been, I enjoyed this book. I remember some of the events that she describes (which I read about in the anarchist press at the time) and it was fun to be brought back to the era. However, I was struck by how naive the author seemed to be and how little she seemed to know about anarchism. That was strange, I thought.

[Trudy Ferguson · Rating 5 out of 5]

The bombing happened on my birthday in Toronto just as I turned 18. Being young and uncertain of the further giving the politics at the time heighten by the Cold War arms race led me to research my curiosities a lot the youth who took action. The book was a page turner. Brilliant and well written. A great historical account of the times from an alternative perspective.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a memoir of a middle-class woman who entered a left-wing direct action cell focused on environmental issues in western Canada. Its a fascinating story, not great writing but a very unique personal history.

[Monster · Rating 5 out of 5]

the most important thing about this book was its realism; romantic portrayals of direct action typically go untamed by some very real physical and ideological conflicts that both end and mutate radicals and radical movements. this book was art: ugly, exciting and intoxicating.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting style and story, kinda didn't like the ending, i felt like i wanted to her more about prison and her mindset there.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

this is what its all about.

[Dawn Marie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hansen is a gifted writer and this tale is useful for anyone involved in movements in canada or the us in particular, concise and honest look at mistakes made.

[Lune · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most interesting stories I have ever read. I don’t condone all that they did but I admire their dedication. I absolutely want to own and read that book again.

[River Wolf · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked up this book since I am a BC resident with an interest in anarchy, eco-terrorism, and counterculture rebels; I also seen Direct Action member Gerry Hannah play in his punk band the Sub-Humans.

I learned a lot about history/politics/activism from this book, found the stories entertaining, and I appreciated the debates on activism even though I support some (but not all) of the acts which Direct Action committed. At times I found that this book was too long in various situations. This memoir covers Ann's story up until her arrest and she is an interesting enough character for me to want to know what she has been up to since, as well as reflections on her past actions.

I find it ironic that the author received a government to write this book despite her being an anarchist; these rebels also collected welfare. I know other identified anarchist-punks who have also received the dole and I find this paradoxical since anarchists should minimize, if not abolish reliance on the government. Perhaps collecting social assistance is one more aspect of fighting the government by depleting the system of capital, but I also believe that one gives the government power by relying on them for resources.

I recommend this book for those who are interested in non-fiction stories of rebellion.

[Samyy · Rating 3 out of 5]

At first, I was really into it. Ann is a good storyteller, & the beginning was very captivating.
With that said, it quickly devolved into something unlike what I was expecting. It was more of a day-to-day diary of Ann's participation in various guerilla efforts. This was fine. It was interesting to see what exactly those looked like. But at times the dialogue was boring, not seeming to drive forward much of the story, only to highlight the relationships within the group.
It also inadvertently highlighted the inability of these groups to properly organize and structure themselves. This is something we are seriously lacking if we ever hope to challenge the larger, and much better organized, oppressive systems.
Still, a worthwhile read, and commendable efforts.

[Uday Bhardwaj · Rating 3 out of 5]

interesting look into her life. not that consistent with the accounts of others but I suppose thats what happens with time. prose effective enough to keep me engaged.