Talk:Irish National Liberation Army

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Ireland (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Northern Ireland (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Irish Republicanism (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish Republicanism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Chiefs of Staff[edit]

Something should be said about the INLA Chiefs of Staff. Here is a incomplete and provisional list. Could anybody complet it? Seamus Costello (1974-1977) Dominic McGlinchey (1982-1984) Hugh Torney(-1995) Gino Gallagher(1995-) I think you've missed out Eddie John McNichol, he was interviewed (back to camera) on Newsnight in the the 70's, I think he may have taken over in the aftermatch of Costello's assasination.

Deadly Divisions refers to a guy called Jap (who nobody I know can put a name to) in the mid eighties who was in charge for a bit, but John O'Reilly was OC in the run up to the IPLO fued until Ta Power and him were taken out by their former comrades. I'd be fairly sure that you could put Torney's reign starting at 1987, and, for tragically obvious reasons, Gallagher's as ending in 1996.

Easy to talk about dead former comrades, and it would be wholly inappropriate to discuss people still in the movement, but it's a reasonable assumption that since Gino's death there's been a fairly continual leadership (which tied with the lack of hooding and fueding probably reflects favourably on the movement)

  • It would not be 'inappropriate' to name people still in the movement (sic) if their involvement can be verified from appropriate sources. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Cover Names[edit]

Any source on these claims? The CRF has been used in a number of incidents, the INLA-related one being the Darkley massacre, in which a man whose family members had been killed by loyalists used an INLA weapon to murder innocent worshippers. There are claims that he'd told the RUC that he'd do such a thing unless those involved in the attacks on his family were arrested, unsurprisingly nothing was done about it.

The PLA was an early name for the INLA, not a cover name. At the time of the IRSP/OSF split, there was quite a bit of debate within the Republican Socialist Movement as to what role their paramilitary group should play. Some founding members wanted it to be a self-defence group, or an attempted reincarnation of the Irish Citizens Army, while others wanted a socialist PIRA more or less. The PLA name was used during the IRSM's early trial by fire, and the INLA was later renamed, as I understand it when Costello's more militaristic viewpoint won out. Anyone 'in the know' should correct me here if I'm wrong.

Never heard the last one, by the way.

I'm not sure that they intended sticking with PLA beyond the first couple of years, Costello needed to keep his powder dry as it were, and the armed wing was primarily defensive - probably knowing the attacks that would come from the Sticks, and in places from the Provies (Brendan McNamee).

Interestingly enough, when McAllister, Brown the Clown, Flynn et al combined to attack the movement they'd left, the first name that appeared on walls was IPLA rather than IPLO, which might reflect an attempt to invoke the original organisation.

Origins[edit]

The belief that the INLA came out of the Provisionals is totally wrong.

The INLA were a supposedly socialist organisation spawned from the Official IRA. The Official IRA comprised the socialist elements of the IRA left after the breakaway by the Provisionals. The breakup of the terror organisation could be said to have been caused by ideological differences in the organisation in the aftermath of the organisation’s calling-off of its military campaign in 1962. The change in emphasis from the military to the political in essence led to the IRA’s inability to defend the Nationalist areas of Belfast in 1969 and from that period the Belfast and Derry elements of the organisation were prominent in initiating the split.

This left elements in what was now the Official IRA, who still believed in a military solution, but their political leanings would not allow them to join the Provisionals. This was essentially the element that formed the INLA and its political wing, the Irish Republican socialist Party (IRSP).

The Provisionals maintained their organisation without a split until Ruairi O’Bradaigh, with the rejection of his abstentionist policies, and Daihi O’Conaill, along with O’Bradaigh, unable to maintain his position in the top posts in Sinn Féin, led a walkout from the 1986 Sinn Féin annual conference and set up Republican Sinn Féin as an organisation committed to the traditional republican policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) _______________________

Someone has deleted information about the INLA's internal feuds, including even the killing of their founder, Seamus Costello and also about thier criminality. I suspect that the motivation for these changes is political, but I would like to assure the moderators that the information I have re-inserted is both true and verifiable. I will provide sources if necessary. Jdorney

Not even the Sticks deny that they killed Costello, so I don't know what you mean here!

___________________________________________________________________________

INLA / IRSP[edit]

You are totally right about the Officials splitting and the INLA being born. Seamus Costello and the other INLA leader were formerley leaders of the OIRA not the PIRA. you are also right about the internal fueds, in which later the splinter group (IPLO) were formed.

One of the smaller rep. groups?[edit]

From what have read INLA is still and has always been the second largest rep. group. Circa 50 members all the time, and with 113 killings, they're no. 4. after PIRA and the two main protestant groups. So that they are "one of the smaller rep. groups" is not correct. Also important to add to the picture is that there has been bigger and more violent groups. But they have been relative short-lived affairs. (Killed, jailed or disbanded after a few years). INLA on the other hand has existed more than 30 years. -Bjarnulf

In the early 70s, there were two large republican paramilitary groups, the PIRA and the Official IRA. the INLA split from the latter. The INLA was a significant paramilitary group in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Since then it has been one of a number of small armed republican groups including the IPLO (now disbanded) the Continuity IRA and the Real IRA. None of these groups has much support or influence. Arguably, of these, the most important is now the Real IRA. The INLA is a very marginal group. Jdorney

Confused[edit]

Bjarnulf, what other 'more powerful' but short-lived groups has their been? Also if you are talking about the most powerful Republican paramilitaries why do you mention the two 'protestant' (you mean Loyalist) paramilitaries behind the PIRA. Infact, both the UDA and UVF have more members than the PIRA and INLA combined.

No tru. By all accounts, the provos have about 1500 members throughout Ireland, the UVF and UDA have about 200 each. The UDA was a mass movement (over 20,000 members) for a short time in the early 70s, but that is a long time ago now.
Jdorney 23:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

It depends what you mean in terms of significance. The INLA, after tearing itself apart in the late 1980s and early 1990s, is probably the second-most involved in vigilante activity in Northern Ireland, and probably also the second most significant group in terms of fund-raising activity, particularly bank robberies. Although they're on ceasefire, they've demonstrated that they can still carry out paramilitary-style actions, particularly killings and attacks on drugs gangs. According to Anthony McIntyre, editor of the Blanket, IRSP can bring 1000 people out for an event in Strabane, one of the IRSM's strongholds, and its Easter march and Hunger Strike commemorations are certainly the second best attended in the North. They've also put up three impressive murals within the last few months. All of this refers to their prestige as a Republican group-- obviously no one could out-fundraise the UDA, who have a massive drugs empire, for example.

The CIRA and RIRA are currently both split and completely ineffective. I wouldn't rate them ahead of the INLA in terms of strength or support, not anymore at least.

Recent Activities?[edit]

Does anyone have information on the INLA's recent activities?It seems this article only goes up to the end of the 20th century.Dermo69

I've added a bit about them targetting drug dealers in Derry. As far as I can find that's all they've really done. There's a bit of debate as to whether the harrasment of the Short Strand Catholics ended because of the Conto's or the INLA.GiollaUidir 15:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

There are a number of factual inacurracies in the article on the INLA. The most obvious is in relation to the kidnapping of John O'Grady. This operation was carries out by the then self-proclaimed 'Irish Revolutionary Brigade' which was led by Dessie O'Hare. The IRSP released a statement at the time stating that they did not support the IRB and believed that their course of action was counter productive. I can post up the statement if anyone wants. O'Hare didnt join the INLA until the mid nineties while in prison.

Factual Inacurracies[edit]

There are a number of factual inacurracies in the article on the INLA. The most obvious is in relation to the kidnapping of John O'Grady. This operation was carries out by the then self-proclaimed 'Irish Revolutionary Brigade' which was led by Dessie O'Hare. The IRSP released a statement at the time stating that they did not support the IRB and believed that their course of action was counter-productive to the national liberation struggle at the time. I can post up the statement if anyone wants. O'Hare didnt join the INLA until the mid nineties while in prison.

Also there are a number of other small, but annoying inaccuracies that need amending! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.134.62.158 (talk) 15:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

        Then fix them. O'Hare was an INLA member in the 80's, wasn't he? As I understand it, he only left after the INLA fell apart...


Dessie was in and out of the movement in the eighties, as many were in the turmoil between the post hungerstrike era, supergrasses, McGlinchey's leadership and fued. However, he was certainly on his own when the O'Grady kidnap took place.

WikiProject IRA?[edit]

Hi all, I'm rather new to the Wiki (just joined up a few days ago), but the whole WikiProject concept seems like an effective tool for gathering a group of people together to work on a specific subject. I'm primarily interested in contributing to areas related to Irish nationalism, and the Irish Republican Army, and I've noticed a few of you have quite a lot of involvement in the same area. So, I wonder if anyone would be interested in forming a WikiProject focusing on Irish Nationalism? Wikipeda:WikiProject Irish Republican Army seems like a good title to me! WP:WPIRA would be a great shortcut! I'm posting this up on many different pages, so I would especially appreciate it if, if you're interested, you would join me at User talk:Johnathan Swift#WikiProject IRA. NonFreeImageRemoved.svgErin Go Bragh 06:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Lead[edit]

I was trying to copyedit the lead, and I'm slightly confused. It states:

Sharing a common ideology with the Irish Republican Socialist Movement (a political wing, the Irish Republican Socialist Party (IRSP), was formed the same day).

But the IRSM article states:

The Irish Republican Socialist Movement is an umbrella term for the political-paramilitary grouping of the Irish Republican Socialist Party, the Irish National Liberation Army, prisoners who belong to either the IRSP or the INLA, the Irish Republican Socialist Committees of North America, and the Republican Socialist Youth Movement.

Did the IRSM pre-date the INLA? One Night In Hackney303 13:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

We're dealing here with the polite fictions of republican paramilitary groups. The term IRSM is a catch all term for all the organisations affiliated to the INLA/IRSP. A better way to put it is that the INLA is the military wing of the IRSM. In theory, the political wing, the IRSP, is seperate from the military wing, the INLA. In fact, the IRSP's role historically has been to act as a spokesman and benefit organisation for the INLA. The leadership of both was orginally vested in one person, Seamus Costello, but since then I'm not sure.

Re the chronology, in theory, again, the IRSP was founded without a military wing. In (IRSP) theory, a group called the People's Liberation Army grew up to defend them from the Official IRA and in theory once again,this group merged with others after the feud to become the INLA. In actual fact, the impetus for the whole INLA/IRSP project came from disgruntled OIRA members in the in the north. Costello, when the left Official IRA/Sinn Fein, he also set up a new paramilitary group from these people. They did not want their group to be associated with republican in-fighting so for the first few months they called themselves the PLA. When they felt ready to start attacking security targets, they began to call themselves the INLA.

Initially, there seems to have been people such as Tony Gregory and Bernadette Devlin who were IRSP but not INLA members and who may not even have known of the INLA's existance. However, these people left the party fairly quickly, meaning that the IRSP has for most of its history been basically a support grou for the INLA.

Does that help? Jdorney 15:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sort of. The IRSM article does make it pretty clear that it's an umbrella for the various groups, but the way the lead is worded in this article seemed to contradict that slightly. The way it's worded is that the IRSM already existed, and the INLA and IRSP shared a common ideology and then came under their banner, for want of a better term. So did the IRSM exist prior to December 1974, or was it formed as an umbrella group at the same time? One Night In Hackney303 15:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The reality is that there is really no organisation called the Irish Republican Socialist Movement. There is the INLA and the closely linked IRSP and their off-shoot organisation in North America. Collectively, these groups can be called the IRSM. It's basically a euphamism used to refer to these closely related groups. Jdorney 16:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I figured as much just the wording confused me. One Night In Hackney303 17:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Disagree with some of your implications here, but hope the rest of my contribtutions help.

ICA[edit]

The INLA have been associating themselves publicly with the words and deeds of the ICA since early 2006. Still not appearing in this article, any particular reason why not ? Fluffy999 20:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Please provide references and I am sure we can weive something into the article.--Vintagekits 12:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph[edit]

Not to mention in the opening paragraph of the article that the INLA was riven with feuding and was sectarian, is indefensible. That was what it did, apart from key political murders like Airey Neave's. Any organisation that could shoot up a mission hall in South Armagh is by definition sectarian. 86.143.63.147 (talk) 10:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

You have been told before not to add your own unsourced opinions to articles, this is not a Loyalist propaganda website. The mere mention of "ironically" means it is nothing other than your own opinion. O Fenian (talk) 12:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorrt forgot to mark my change with 86.143.63.147 (talk) 19:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC) (only learning some of these techniques). Just read your aggressive and proprietorial comment above. Why do you call me loyalist? And is that a crime greater than calling the INLA sectarian for murdering Protestant churchgoers?

I did not call you a loyalist. I said your edit was loyalist propaganda, but if the cap fits.. Please stop adding your own unsourced opinion to this, or any other, article. O Fenian (talk) 09:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Added opponents[edit]

I have added the Republic of Ireland (which bans the INLA) as an opponent as well as the LVF, as the murder/assassination/hit on Billy Wright. V. Joe (talk) 20:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Apparently editors here do not think that those opposed to the INLA should be listed as 'opponents'. As this then leaves us with only a pro-INLA POV I have removed opponents altogether. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 00:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
  • It would be helpful if people who keep reverting these edits would discuss their reasons here. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Simply because they didnt view them as opponants. Can you please provide a source which outlines that they did?--Vintagekits (talk) 12:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
  • INLA/IRSP believes in the creation of an Irish Workers' Republic in the 32 counties of Ireland. They are ideologically opposed to the Republic of Ireland as currently constituted and have carried out acts of violence in the Republic of Ireland in which members of the Gardaí were killed. In terms of the European Union, INLA/IRSP "is totally opposed to membership of the European community" which they say "is a political structure created by the capitalists of Europe, initially at the behest of U.S. imperialism, to strengthen their hold over the European working class". I'd suggest that in its current form the 'opponents' section of the info box is pretty meaningless and should perhaps be replaced with a 'status' section as per the ETA article. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 13:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Removed various. See Talk:Provisional Irish Republican Army#Opponents (this includes CIRA, INLA and any other articles people try it with) for a centralised discussion on this. 2 lines of K303 13:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Removed opponents (in good faith). I think this is a satisfactory compromise. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 14:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
So we're not even allowed to say who the INLA were opposed to? Not likely. 2 lines of K303 14:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
It would seem to make the most sense if this is to be a limited list taken from a non-NPOV and which excludes those who were opposed to INLA. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)