The cause of this riot was not Tulsa. It might have happened anywhere for the Negro is not the same man he was thirty years ago when he was content to plod along his own road accepting the white man as his benefactor. But the years have passed and the Negro has been educated and the race papers have spread the thought of race equality.
Specifically, 'black wall street' was a specific area of rich black people, yet this statement says "the cause of this riot was not Tulsa". And "It might have happened anywhere". If it "might have happened anywhere", it therefore has nothing to do with being the unique high-wealth of this area.
When you find yourself drawing parallels between your own arguments and those of contemporary white supremacists asserting that the attitudes of local whites were not at all to blame, it's perhaps a good idea to reconsider...
Delving into "you're a racist if you don't agree with my take on this event" is a very, very scummy and morally bankrupt thing to do. Especially since you're literally making up that comparison, for nothing I've said indicates I absolved anyone of anything at all. In fact, I've been asserting that whites of the time didn't need a special reason, like wealth, to do what they did.
People asserting that wealth was required to cause this tragedy, are actually giving excuses as to why it happened. Racism doesn't require that.