Latest news with #Elad
Days of Palestine
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Days of Palestine
Israeli Court Upholds Expulsion of Palestinian Rajabi Family from Silwan
DayofPal– An Israeli court has upheld the forced expulsion of the Rajabi family from their home in the Batn Al-Hawa neighborhood of Silwan, located just south of Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied Jerusalem. The decision, issued Sunday by the Central Court, marks the end of a years-long legal battle and the final rejection of the family's appeals against eviction efforts spearheaded by the right-wing settler organization Ateret Cohanim. The court ruled in favor of Ateret Cohanim's claim that the land in question once belonged to Yemeni Jews who settled in the area in 1881, decades before the founding of the State of Israel. The ruling affirms a previous decision by the Israeli Supreme Court, which last year upheld the legitimacy of the settler group's claim and authorized the eviction of the Rajabi family. The property at the center of the dispute comprises a three-story building housing 16 people across three apartments. The Wadi Hilweh Information Center, a Palestinian media group based in Silwan, confirmed the court's ruling and warned of its broader implications for the neighborhood. In a statement, the Jerusalem Governorate condemned the expulsion as part of 'a systematic policy of ethnic cleansing' aimed at altering the demographic and cultural character of East Jerusalem. Human rights organizations and Palestinian officials say the ruling is emblematic of Israel's broader strategy to Judaize Silwan and surrounding areas through a combination of legal action, state-backed settlement activity, and intensified enforcement measures. The Rajabi family is one of dozens targeted by Ateret Cohanim, which launched a wave of lawsuits in 2015 seeking the removal of Palestinian residents from Batn Al-Hawa. The group claims ownership of the land based on 19th-century trust documents allegedly linking the properties to Jewish residents from Yemen. According to the Batn Al-Hawa neighborhood committee, more than 80 Palestinian families in the area, home to over 10,000 resident, are currently facing expulsion threats. Zohair Rajabi, head of the committee and a member of the displaced family, accused the Israeli judiciary of acting in concert with settler groups. 'This is not justice,' Rajabi said following the court's decision. 'The courts are working in full coordination with settler organizations to expel us from our homes and erase our history.' In recent months, Israeli courts have issued additional expulsion orders targeting other Palestinian families in Batn Al-Hawa, including the Odeh and Shweiki households, under similar legal arguments advanced by settler entities. Silwan, which spans approximately 5,640 dunams, is home to around 60,000 Palestinians. An estimated 3,000 Israeli settlers now reside in the neighborhood, many of whom are affiliated with groups like Ateret Cohanim and Elad, an influential settler organization founded in 1986 by former Israeli army officer David Be'eri. Backed by state institutions and aided by favorable court rulings, Elad has seized at least 87 buildings in Silwan over the past decade. Zohair Rajabi warned that an additional 87 families, representing between 700 and 800 people, remain under immediate threat of displacement. 'This is a coordinated and deliberate campaign to empty Jerusalem of its Palestinian residents,' he said. The escalation of evictions has been accompanied by an increase in demolitions, arrests, and legal pressure on Palestinian communities in East Jerusalem. Human rights advocates have called for international intervention, arguing that the policy violates international law and undermines any prospects for a future political resolution in the city. Shortlink for this post:
Scroll.in
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Scroll.in
Some want Israel to use Lanka-style brutality against Hamas – ignoring the strategy's true costs
As Israel's war on Hamas grinds into its 20th month, comparisons with Sri Lanka's 2009 military defeat of the Tamil Tigers have grown louder. For some, Sri Lanka represents a rare example of a state achieving total military victory over a powerful insurgent group. Among those advancing this approach is Israeli security expert Moshe Elad, who told The Jerusalem Post last month that Sri Lanka demonstrated how 'terror groups can…be completely defeated through military means'. 'Sri Lanka did it without a Supreme Court or B'Tselem,' Elad remarked, referring to the absence of legal considerations or scrutiny by human rights groups. Other security experts have also drawn parallels between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and Hamas. The subtext is clear: Israel should consider following the Sri Lankan model, mounting a campaign of overwhelming force to annihilate Hamas. This argument misses the fact that Sri Lanka's victory came at the cost of immense civilian suffering, long-term instability and international legitimacy. If Israel borrows this script, it may not just replicate Sri Lanka's battlefield gains, it may also inherit its political and moral collapse. The Sri Lankan government's war against the LTTE was among the most brutal counterinsurgency campaigns of the past century. Between 2006 and 2009, the Sri Lankan military launched coordinated offensives across several fronts and methodically dismantled the LTTE's war-making capacity. But this military strategy also relied on a scorched-earth approach that devastated the civilian population. As the fighting intensified, over 300,000 Tamil civilians were cornered in shrinking pockets of territory. Areas designated as 'no fire zones' were bombed; hospitals and schools were destroyed. International observers, journalists, and aid agencies were expelled or obstructed. In the final phase of the war, estimates suggest between 40,000 and 70,000 civilians were killed. The government denied any wrongdoing. With geopolitical momentum on its side, Sri Lanka largely avoided any real accountability. To frame this as a success story is to treat mass atrocity as a price worth paying. The danger lies not only in the ethical cost of such logic but also in its strategic consequences. Sri Lanka's post-war years did not deliver national unity or sustainable peace. While the LTTE was wiped out as a fighting force, the deep-rooted ethnic conflict between Sinhalese and Tamils remained unresolved. The Rajapaksa government diverted enormous resources to militarise the island's north east, suppress dissent, and reconstruct the region in ways that alienated the Tamil population even further. At the same time, the war effort saddled Sri Lanka with massive debt, much of it used to fund military expansion and prestige infrastructure projects. Combined with corruption and cronyism, this laid the groundwork for Sri Lanka's economic collapse. By 2022, the country defaulted on its debt, faced crippling inflation, and experienced widespread protests that forced the Rajapaksa family from power. The political establishment that had claimed glory in war could not survive peace. If Israel adopts the Sri Lankan strategy, it risks repeating not only its military triumph but its unraveling. A military win that generates long-term instability is not a victory – it is a delayed crisis. Even as a matter of tactics, the analogy fails to hold. Hamas is embedded in a radically different geopolitical context. It has strong state backers, including Iran and Qatar, and its leadership has adapted to operate in decentralised, transnational ways. The LTTE, by contrast, was increasingly isolated diplomatically by the end of its war. Its support networks were disrupted and its leadership physically cornered in a fixed geographic zone. One of the most dangerous elements of the Sri Lanka comparison lies in the way that the LTTE was completely dehumanised. The World Trade Center attack in the US in 2001 resulted in a conclusive shift in global counterterrorism discourse. Groups labeled as 'terrorists' were increasingly framed not as political or military actors with goals and constituencies, but as existential threats requiring elimination. This allowed states to ignore civilian protections, blur the lines between combatants and noncombatants and justify extreme violence. In Sri Lanka, this meant Tamil civilians were often treated as extensions of the LTTE, collateral in a war that no longer differentiated between targets. In Gaza, similar dynamics are playing out. Entire neighborhoods have been flattened. Civilian infrastructure is treated as inherently suspicious. Humanitarian corridors are shelled. Over 55,000 Palestinians have been killed since the war began in October 2023, many of them women and children. As in Sri Lanka, the dominant narrative paints the population as indistinguishable from the militants. This kind of discourse is not just ethically corrosive. It is strategically shortsighted. It fuels grievance, radicalisation and long-term resistance. When civilians are treated as complicit, the political space for any future reconciliation disappears. Sri Lanka's 'success' was in part made possible by international fatigue. The West, entangled in Iraq and Afghanistan, had little appetite to challenge a state that framed its campaign as part of the global war on terror. Sri Lanka exploited this context to conduct its final war with near-total impunity. But the effects of that impunity linger. The country remains diplomatically almost isolated on human rights issues, its war crimes unresolved and its path to reconciliation blocked by unresolved trauma. The silence of the international community did not make the consequences disappear – it only deferred them. Israel faces a different international landscape. The International Court of Justice has already found plausible grounds to investigate Israel's actions in Gaza under the Genocide Convention. Civil society mobilisation has been far more rapid and global. The legal, political and reputational costs are mounting. To adopt a strategy modeled on Sri Lanka in this context is not just a moral risk. It is a gamble against the weight of international law and memory. Even if Israel were to militarily defeat Hamas, the aftermath would not be straightforward. Gaza would remain devastated, politically ungovernable and socially fractured. The destruction of whatever is left of Hamas's current leadership would not erase the ideas that fuel its support. Nor would it build a foundation for coexistence. Without a parallel political strategy aimed at restoring Palestinian agency, justice and rights, another iteration of Hamas – or something worse – will emerge. Sri Lanka shows that annihilation can end a war, but not the conflict that produced it. It also shows that the consequences of how a war ends last far longer than the military campaign itself. Elad is right that Sri Lanka fought its war without a Supreme Court or a B'Tselem. That is exactly why it should not be the model.
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
New motion marks Alberto Osuna's latest bid to play baseball at Tennessee
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (WATE) — Alberto Osuna has launched another bid in his ongoing efforts to gain NCAA eligibility and suit up for the Tennessee baseball team. A motion was filed Monday in federal court seeking to reverse the denial of a preliminary injunction that would've him allowed him to take the field for the national champion Volunteers. The motion pointed to a recent decision by the District Court of New Jersey that granted eligibility to Rutgers football player Jett Elad for the 2025 season, contending that Osuna's request should be granted since both cases are largely based on the same evidence. 'Elad involves the same JUCO rules and same Sherman Act antitrust claim at issue in this case. Elad also submitted and relied on substantially the same evidence as Osuna, including the expert testimony of Dr. Joel Maxcy regarding the anticompetitive effects of the NCAA's JUCO rules. The NCAA's JUCO rules have now been enjoined by two District Courts who relied on expert testimony provided by Dr. Maxcy that is the same or substantially the same as the evidence and testimony provided in this case.' Federal motion filed on April 28 He filed a lawsuit against the NCAA in February, arguing that his one season at Walters State Community College should not count against his eligibility. He played the 2021 season at the school in Morristown, Tennessee before spending the last three years at North Carolina. Osuna had joined Division II program Tampa believing he had no Division I eligibility left. When an injunction was issued allowing Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia to play another year after a judge determined that his season at New Mexico Military Institute shouldn't count against his Division I eligibility, Osuna entered the transfer portal and came to Tennessee in hopes that he would win a similar ruling. Burchett chides NCAA on House floor over Osuna's fight to play baseball at Tennessee All three cases assert that NCAA rules violate the federal antitrust law, arguing that using junior college play into determine Division I eligibility denies athletes the full earning potential they would've received from four full years of name, image and likeness opportunities at a D-I program. Osuna batted .259 with a .359 on-base percentage, 45 homers and 140 RBIs in 177 career games at North Carolina over the last three seasons. He hit .281 with a .376 on-base percentage, 14 homers and 56 RBIs in 62 games last season while helping the Tar Heels reach the College World Series. No. 5/12 Tennessee currently sits in fourth place in the SEC baseball standings with a record of 13-8 in conference play. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Rutgers football safety Jett Elad ruled eligible for 2025 following court decision
Rutgers football safety Jett Elad has won a preliminary injunction that will grant him eligibility for the 2025 season, according to a decision released by United States District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi on Friday. Elad, who transferred to Rutgers from UNLV, filed a lawsuit against the NCAA hoping to block the institution from enforcing its five-year rule, which allows for four competitive seasons in a five-year timeframe. Elad and Rutgers argued that Elad's year at Garden City Community College in 2022 should not count toward his eligibility. This will be Elad's seventh season of college football. He previously spent three years at Ohio University before his JUCO year – he redshirted in 2019 and 2020, which didn't count toward his eligibility after the NCAA issued a waiver to all athletes because of the pandemic. Much of the reason for Elad's argument stemmed from the ruling the NCAA made on Diego Pavia, the Vanderbilt quarterback who won an NCAA injunction before last season after he argued his JUCO year shouldn't count toward his eligibility clock. In December, the NCAA announced that athletes would be eligible for 2025-26 if they competed at a 'non-NCAA school for one or two years' previously and would have exhausted their eligibility following the 2024-25 year. Rutgers coach Greg Schiano testified in Elad's case. The court's decision is a major win for the Scarlet Knights, who will have one of their top impact transfers available next season. This article originally appeared on Rutgers football: Jett Elad granted eligibility for 2025
USA Today
25-04-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Rutgers football safety Jett Elad ruled eligible for 2025 following court decision
Rutgers football safety Jett Elad ruled eligible for 2025 following court decision Show Caption Hide Caption Rutgers University Football schedule for 2025 Rutgers University Football schedule for 2025 Rutgers football safety Jett Elad has won a preliminary injunction that will grant him eligibility for the 2025 season, according to a decision released by United States District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi on Friday. Elad, who transferred to Rutgers from UNLV, filed a lawsuit against the NCAA hoping to block the institution from enforcing its five-year rule, which allows for four competitive seasons in a five-year timeframe. Elad and Rutgers argued that Elad's year at Garden City Community College in 2022 should not count toward his eligibility. This will be Elad's seventh season of college football. He previously spent three years at Ohio University before his JUCO year – he redshirted in 2019 and 2020, which didn't count toward his eligibility after the NCAA issued a waiver to all athletes because of the pandemic. Much of the reason for Elad's argument stemmed from the ruling the NCAA made on Diego Pavia, the Vanderbilt quarterback who won an NCAA injunction before last season after he argued his JUCO year shouldn't count toward his eligibility clock. In December, the NCAA announced that athletes would be eligible for 2025-26 if they competed at a 'non-NCAA school for one or two years' previously and would have exhausted their eligibility following the 2024-25 year. Rutgers coach Greg Schiano testified in Elad's case. The court's decision is a major win for the Scarlet Knights, who will have one of their top impact transfers available next season.
