Health, I know a (Chareidi) rav who said that he was told by an elderly woman that the Turks kept order by grabbing an Arab every Fri and hanging him next to Shaar Shechem as a warning. Do you really want us to do that?
555, the root of the problem is that when Jordan controlled Yehuda v’Shomron Hussein rewarded people he wanted to reward by giving them land. However, it was conditioned on them working it. Being that if they fell into disfavor he would take it away they did not bother but when the situation became frozen with the Six-Day War they remained the owners on paper – but the previous owners were also owners on paper. Being that the PA has decreed the death penalty on Arabs who sell real estate to Jews purchases must be made through intermediaries and straw companies – and usually the seller is someone who is emigrating. Thus it sometimes happens that when land is purchased another Arab pops up and claims that he is the true owner. The court then has to decide who is right. Sometimes they decide for the Jews, sometimes not – and the Arab who is declared the owner will obviously not sell even though for security reasons he will never be able to set foot on the property. In that case the cabinet ministers are, as we say here, caught between the hammer and the anvil. On the one hand, they cannot thumb their noses at the court because abandoning the rule of law will have disastrous effects both domestically and in foreign affairs. on the other hand, they do not want violent confrontations with yahoos. In this case, the best way out was achieved. The shul will not be destroyed, just moved. The new property is indisputably government-owned so their is no legal problem.