Talk:Óglaigh na hÉireann (Continuity IRA splinter group)

I.R.A. WikiProject?

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. Erin Go Bragh 06:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Name

Part 1

I moved this to Óglaigh na hÉireann (CIRA splinter group) as it's a shorter and I think tidier name. Any objections with this, as I see people were discussing it before, feel free to bring it up. I just went ahead to WP:BB -- Pauric (talk-contributions) 14:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd really prefer Óglaigh na hÉireann (2006). I think it's shorter, and I believe that both groups wish to be disassociated from one another. They're not exactly playing on the same shinty team, though they're playing for the same goal. Something that doesn't reference CIRA. Erin Go Bragh 09:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

IMHO keeping the tag CIRA (Óglaigh na hÉireann (CIRA)) in the title might be better for disambiguation purposes. The use of the term by the Provisional IRA and the Irish defence forces could make using a date confusing--Cailil 01:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the majority of ÓnaÉ's members actually split from the Real IRA. ÓnaÉ have been known to co-operate with the Continuity IRA.Naraic (talk) 17:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

The bomb planted near Forkhill in Sept. 2009 was reported in the press to have been the work of the faction of the "Real IRA" associated with Liam Campbell, not any splinter of the CIRA. There is, in general, great confusion about the various outfits describing themselves as Oglaigh na hEireann. A spokesman for one such group gave an interview to Suzanne Breen in which he said most members of his "army" were ex-Provos, with some ex-RIRA. This may or may not have been the same group that planted the Forkhill bomb and another bomb discovered near Castlewellan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.165.201.47 (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Part 2

Lads, there are two ONH groups. One operating soley in Derry area (the CIRA splinter) and the other operating in Armagh, DOwn & Belfast who are made up of ex-RIRA and PIRA members. This article is completely wrong in claiming that the group carrying out these bombings was the CIRA splinter. There is also another ONH based in Strabane.

This is common knowledge to those on the ground although it doesn't seem the newspapers know the difference.

The ONH responsible for all the recent attacks is linked to the New Republican Forum and is believed to be run by the faction who supported the RIRA ceasefire and were later expelled.--Baldeadly (talk) 12:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

If it can be backed by reliable sources then it should be put in the article. We should also think about moving it to something like Óglaigh na hÉireann (splinter group). Thoughts? ~Asarlaí 17:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll try find some but they are few and far between. Meanwhile could you change it to say (dissident republican group) or just (splinter group). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baldeadly (talk • contribs) 02:02, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I disagree strongly. Óglaigh na hÉireann are the constitutional defence forces of Ireland. They have no splinter group. The looniespeople described in this article are something complely different. --Red King (talk)12:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Have found a source which references them properly as a RIRA splinter and not CIRA. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/17/remote-bomb-killed-psni-officer)--Baldeadly (talk) 01:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

The fact is, we don't know for sure whether these are two separate groups, two factions of the same group, or just the same group operating in different regions. When an attack is claimed by ÓnaÉ, those claiming the attack don't make any distinction. When reporting the attack, the media (as far as I know) have only made a distinction a handful of times. As the article notes, a distinction isn't usually made by anyone.

Therefore, I think this article should include all attacks claimed by ÓnaÉ and if the media make a distinction then we note it.

If there are no objections, I plan on moving this article to Óglaigh na hÉireann (splinter group) shortly.

~Asarlaí 12:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I object strongly. Óglaigh na hÉireann are the constitutional defence forces of Ireland. They have no splinters. The Irish Republican Army were the forces of the Irish Republic who fought the War of Independence, with the authority of Dáil Éireann. Nothing should be done in terms of naming that might cause anyone to confuse the head-cases described in this article with either of those two august bodies. The proposed name is not a valid disambiguation. If you still wish to propose an article move, you must use the "Requested move" procedure as this would be a highly controversial move. --Red King (talk) 00:10, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

How about "(Provisional IRA splinter group)' since that is a lot closer to what they are. --Red King (talk) 00:18, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Whether we like it or not, other groups have and continue to use the name Óglaigh na hÉireann. This is not Leinster House, nor is it a forum to argue over who has the right to use the name. Also, although it's not utterly wrong to say this group is a Provisional IRA splinter, we have no sources calling it that. ~Asarlaí 00:24, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Object to any move in order to do an end-run round policy. The incidents that aren't specifically attributed to this group should be removed, not left in with some half-arsed attempt to write about two different groups in the same article. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 14:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

As has been already discussed, there are two groups(excluding the irish army) claiming this name, the article title only describes one, and many of the actions carried out in the list were actually perpetrated by the Real IRA faction known as oglaigh na heireann rather than the Continuity IRA splinter group, I would propose a change of name to something which represents both groups such as 'Óglaigh na hÉireann (Dissident Republican Paramilitary)' or something similar.--PALESTINE1234 (talk) 00:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

A name change is definitely needed, as the recent interview has shown. This article should be about the group who were the focus of that interview and who were responsible for all the major attacks listed in 2010 (the car bomb attack on Palace Barracks, the car bomb attack on Strand Road PSNI station, the grenade attack on PSNI officers in Belfast, etc). ~Asarlaí 00:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

No name change is needed, only someone prepared to bring the article in line with policy. Which is what I have done.... 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 13:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

If nobody objects I will change the article name to 'Óglaigh na hÉireann (Dissident Republican Paramilitary)'--PALESTINE1234 (talk) 17:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

No thanks. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 13:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Since the article now exclusively covers the Continuity IRA splinter group called Óglaigh na hÉireann, a new article needs to be created to cover the other, more active Óglaigh na hÉireann.--PALESTINE1234 (talk) 23:43, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Agreed... although it would've been much easier and more sensible just to rename it and remove the handful of actions by the CIRA splinter. What should we call the new article? ~Asarlaí 00:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I forward the name Óglaigh na hÉireann (Dissident Republican Group), although I would support a name that makes a clearer distinction between the two groups.--PALESTINE1234 (talk) 14:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

First, the group we're dealing with is much more active than the CIRA splinter. Second, it didn't emerge from one particular faction (e.g. CIRA, RIRA, INLA). With that in mind, how about Óglaigh na hÉireann (2005) or Óglaigh na hÉireann (splinter group)? ~Asarlaí 18:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Dissent republican group sounds better than just (2005) or (splinter group). Mabuska ^(talk) 00:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Ideally it should match the disambiguation used in this article. While "(splinter group)" may not ideally disambiguate it from *this article*, it's actually the other way round and this article would be disambiguated from the new one by the "Continuity Irish Republican Army" part. Both articles will need hatnotes obviously. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 13:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

But it hasnt splintered from any other group, it just came about by itself although it claims to have many members who have left various other republican groups.--PALESTINE1234 (talk) 15:46, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Reliable source say it is a splinter group. While it may have members that have splintered from several different organisations, it is stil a splinter group as the term is understood. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 13:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Update: Someone has created a page for the more active ÓnaÉ at Real IRA/ONH. I think we should continue this discussion on its talkpage. ~Asarlaí 12:10, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Politics?

What are the politics of this group and why did they split from the CIRA/RSF? Do they havea political wing, a newspaper, a website? HAve they issued any press releases?

Jdorney 23:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Probably not.People only know about them because of the IMC report. Dermo69 15:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Oglaigh na hÉireann is the legal and official Name of the Irish Defense Forces.

Merge

Merge this article with Continuity IRA?This group is not noticeable or important.They'll probably fade away and we'll be left with this article. Dermo69 15:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Dermo, wiki is not a crystal ball, who knows what way this group will go.--Vintagekits 15:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

They're still not important in any way.Haven't killed anyone and only robbed a post office.Even look at the title. Dermo69 16:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

So who's for the merge then? Dermo69 20:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The CIRA have never killed anyone either, so far as I know. -- Pauric (talk-contributions) 23:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

No I don't they've killed anyone either.But at least most people have heard of the CIRA! And they've carried out several large bombings so they're noticeable. Dermo69 11:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Different organisation different article in my opinion. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 07:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge- not notable enough for their own article. Astrotrain 12:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The AfD proved that to be wrong, so I'm removing the merge tags. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 17:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The group has carried out several attacks against anti-social elements. The CIRA have killed people, and shortly so will ÓnaÉ.Naraic (talk) 17:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Drug-dealing?

I heard that this group was involved in drug dealing, can anyone validate or dismiss this? If so this should be included in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.219.125 (talk) 13:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

This may be a late response but all paramilitary groups in NI are involved in drug dealing to some degree even those that have branches that act against druggies (no doubt to protect their own trade). Mabuska ^(talk) 17:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever linking this group to drug dealing. Nor is there any evidence linking any Irish Republican groups (with the exception of the IPLO) to drug dealing, only loyalist groups. Mabuska should probably stop reading the Sunday World.--Baldeadly (talk) 00:22, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Lol i don't read the Sunday World its the biggest pile of bullcrap, though you shouldn't make comments about editors its against Wiki civility policy. Though do you have sources to back up your claims only loyalist groups are involved the drug business? Are you a member of this exact criminal group to 100% know that they don't? Mabuska ^(talk) 11:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Onus is on you to provide evidence that they are involved in drug-dealing. Regarding loyalist groups, I suppose the deaths of UDA leaders of drug overdoses and the fact that UVF and LVF leaders have spent time in prison over dealing is untrue? Could you name me one Republican paramilitary who spent time in prison for drugs offences? Didn't think so..--Baldeadly (talk) 22:00, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't care less if loyalist groups do drugs, i've never said they didn't. It sounds like because i say republicans do you automatically label me a loyalist sympathiser? Such assumptions shouldn't be made about people without something to back it up. For example i could assume from your account that you are a republican symnpathiser and naturally going to do your best to deny anything that would tarnish them. However their very actions tarnish them anyway.

“ Gardai say the Dublin Real IRA is also heavily involved in the pub and club bouncer business in which owners are forced to accept their members as doormen. These doormen then allow drug dealers in who pay the organisation so that they can operate in the premises.[1] ”

“ While the dissidents in the Republic are purely criminal the dissidents in the North are a mixture of both criminal and terrorist. Republican sources in Belfast, Derry and in the border area say the dissidents have recruited large numbers of young men, many of them drug users, and are heavily engaged in extorting money from drug dealers. In Belfast the dissidents are also directly involved in the drugs trade.[2] ”

Sounds like they are complicit in drug-dealing. I'm also sure Seamus McGreevy would of been arrested and charged over that cannabis production plant if he didn't hang himself. However no doubt you will disagree and post a rebuttal to protect their reputation, which i couldn't care less about as you will no doubt maintain your viewpoint no matter. As far as i'm concerned i've vindicated myself and nothing you say will make me think otherwise. Mabuska ^(talk) 11:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Groups like the Real IRA, CIRA splinter group oglaigh na heireann, and especially the continuity IRA have been involved in the drugs trade, despite their official anti drugs stance, they have not been directly selling drugs but many of their members are drug users and have taken protection money from drug dealers, whether we like it or not, I know this because I have seen it done by the local members. However the Provisional IRA and the more active Oglaigh Na Heireann remain staunchly against drugs.--PALESTINE1234 (talk) 14:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Sources

I'm sorry Superfopp but sources for these claims are needed whether or not its basic Irish or not. To be included it needs verifiable real-world usage and not personal research. In regards to the translation fact tag - whilst it may translate as that, for Wikipedia a source should be provided. Northern Star ^(talk) 21:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I've added sources for the translation of Óglaigh na hÉireann. ~Asarlaí 21:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

That's much better. Northern Star ^(talk) 21:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

List of actions

So does this article actually need a full list of actions by this criminal group? If so this articles length will go on and on getting into rediculous size. Would it not be better to summize it down into the major criminal actions it claims to have committed rather than every little bit of criminality they do? Mabuska ^(talk) 22:25, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Move

I have moved back to the original title as I stated in the move there's more than one organisation with that name as it says in the lengthy discussion on the talk page. Mo ainm~Talk 15:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Anyone confused should read the 21st report from the IMC before editing and making incorrect moves. O Fenian (talk) 17:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I made the move after reading the Independent Monitoring Commission reports and seeing only one Óglaigh na hÉireann listed here. From page 7 of the 22nd Report of the IMC you can see in footnote 7 this quote:

In our previous report we pointed out that there had been confusion in some parts of the media over the term “ONH”, which was then starting to be used by a faction of RIRA and so was not confined to the dissident republican grouping in the Strabane area which had earlier assumed the name and to which we are referring in this paragraph.

But having read the 8th report now I think I am correct in stating that there are three Óglaigh na hÉireanns mentioned in IMC reports

1. CIRA splinter group (page 14 of 8th report)
2. Strabane based (page 7 of 22nd report)
3. faction of RIRA (page 7 of 22nd report)

Am I correct in listing these three as such? If one or more of these is a name assumed to conduct paramilitary activity and obscure who did it I believe we should create an article which lists assumed names of republican paramilitaries.--Profitoftruth85 (talk) 23:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

The CIRA splinter group and the Strabane based one are the same one, as the 21st report says. It reads "In past reports we have used the term Óglaigh na hÉireann (ONH) to refer to the dissident republican grouping which had assumed the name and was operating mainly in the Strabane area

The BBC article should also be read, although the part that says "which emerged around 2005" does not refer to when the group became publicly known, which was in fact around 2009 seemingly. 2005 is when the group chose to form, not when they made their existence public. However the BBC article does also say "Other groups which have used the title Oglaigh na hEireann include a faction which split from the Continuity IRA in 2006 and a Real IRA splinter group". The first one is obviously the organisation in this article.

All this will make it very confusing to write about any of the organisations, unless the source is explicit about which organisation it is talking about. The IMC say the media are not making it clear, unless it is clear the source really should not be used for organisation specific articles. O Fenian (talk) 00:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 20:52, 12 February 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Óglaigh na hÉireann (Continuity Irish Republican Army splinter group) → Óglaigh na hÉireann (Continuity IRA splinter group) – Shorter title. For consistency with Óglaigh na hÉireann (Real IRA splinter group). Kwekubo (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Support: For consistency with the way Real IRA splinter group is titled werldwayd (talk) 18:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

• Support. CsDix (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge (June 2013)

I propose we merge this article into Continuity IRA. It's quite short, it can't be expanded much, and I think it fails to meet the notability gidelines. During the group's three-year lifespan it was responsible for a few pipe bomb attacks, a few robberies, bomb hoaxes, and (maybe) one shooting. This could be summarized in a line or two. ~Asarlaí 14:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)