The issue of concern at the moment is that the statement you led off with above ("They got along just fine during that time period") was plainly untenable -- and not only untenable, but basically an outright inversion of what was happening at the time -- by any reading of the conflict, no matter how one might view its broader causes.

There's nothing in the least controversial in regard to this point; it's just basic history -- and certainly nothing provocative in pointing it out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercommunal_conflict_in_Mand...

It's very much as if you had just said "Protestants and Catholics got along just fine in Northern Ireland during The Troubles", and then went on to extrapolate and moralize further about that conflict -- in terms of measured statistics and Bayesian analysis, no less.

Do you not see any problem with this?

The hebron massacre happened 12 years after the Balfour Declaration so at that point the Palestinians were already fully aware that they were being colonized and they had also experienced discrimination and violence at the hands of the british and the zionists. Just describing this violence with "both sides" is erasing so much colonial history and justified resistance by Palestinians who had every right to oppose the colonization they saw unfolding right before their eyes.