What is happening in Jerusalem?

Your indignation is humorous. You made the statement:

....thus indicating a uniqueness of the Jewish religion and claims for the land, even after 3000 years of Diaspora. I merely pointed out the irony that the Canaanites never got to worship their fairytale deities because the Israelites were allegedly commanded by their fairytale deity to commit genocide and wipe said Canaanites out. 

The Canaanites were annihilated by the Israelites. A biblical case of genocide. But Yahweh said it was okay.

If you know any Baal, Ishtar or any Jebbusite El Elyon worshippers who still speak the language, even if only ritualistically, celebrate their festivals, even if only culturually, formed cohesive communities throught the diaspora for the last 3000 years celebrating their Jebbusite culture and beliefs, then by all means. Have them give me a call! Im sure we can find a place for them. 

In any case, your need to point to no longer existent peoples further demonstrates the uniqueness of Jewish history in this regard. 

I 'learnt something indeed', to channel ssmarcus' condescension.  I learnt there is a side to Israel I didn't want to see.  And now that I have, I will never be able to unsee it. Gosh!

If you are so convinced that WW2 had nothing to do with Israel, why would it take until well after the war to establish Israel? If the rationale was really so obvious as you wish to believe, you'd have an Israel state before 1930 and the persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany easily averted. 

And that the eviction happened centuries ago has a bearing on the issue, whether you like it or not.  Lewian gave you a good explanation as to why.  As I said, you remain in denial or rather, you are so convinced about the narrative you hold dear that we are basically talking past you.  We are able to visualize why such a claim would be immensely problematic if it were applied universally.  You either can't or you do not care.  That kind of conviction somehow sounds not wholly different from sharia to me, if I may.

If "the area "from the river to the sea" is the historic homeland of the Jewish people" is not a religious claim, what is it then?  If you say it is a mere cultural claim, how does your claim supersede that of the Arabs who had already settled there?  Why should the international community then specifically look into the claims of Jews?  No, that is not the reason.  The reason has everything to do with WW2 and given that you go to great lengths to deny it, you don't have a leg to stand on when you accuse me of posting historical falsehoods.  Nobody would give a sh*t about what Israelis want if it was purely about some nostalgic longing to return to your 'true homeland' (whatever that means).  The reason it became a vexed issue had everything to do with Europe becoming inhospitable for Jews.  Otherwise why should others have anything to do with the quarrels between Jews and Arabs, how does it matter in the slightest to us? 

I'm not aware of a statute of limitations on the right to self-determination. If god forbid, the French expelled the Italians and the Italian peninsula was then re-inhabitted by Germans, at what point would the Italians have to give up their right to return? And what if those Germans decided they wanted to declare their own state on that land? Why should they get it? Dont they already have Germany as their place for exercising self-determination? And how exactly should the Italians mount their return doing so will stoke the ire of the world thereby further exacerbating their exile and oppression? 

The truth of the matter is, the reason this case is so peculiar is because there really are no historical precedents for this. In reality,  those Italians in my example will eventually assimilate into the lands they were exiled to therefore, by default, giving up their claim just like every other conquered, exiled, enslaved, repressed, forcibly converted people through out history. But we Jews have managed to maintain our culture, our religion, our language, our history, basically our entire sense of self and connectedness to our country and peoplehood despite the exile. 

We've never relinquished our right to our home. Despite our return, the Arabs living there have every right to continue to live there in peace and security. I will even admit (at the expense of opening up my position to attacks) that how we treat the minorities in our territory is the ultimate test of our moral character as a people. I fully embrace that idea and live by it. But if those Arabs are unwilling to share or recognize our historic rights, then what does that say about their moral character as a people?