Wow, you two are new to this game! This is a find-and-replace operation, not just a find. Because in conservative-land, you don't just edit out the parts you don't like, you figure out what the conservative press of the day said and repeat that uncritically, citing the press itself as evidence of an "alternative truth". There have always been white nationalists in US history, so there's no need to go through the trouble of inventing a counter-narrative, one almost certainly already exists for you to piggy-back onto. As it does here. Your passage should read:
Following the sexual assault of a teenaged white woman by an adult Black criminal named Dick Rowland, the event later named the Tulsa race riot took place on May 31 and June 1, 1921, ending only when a coalition of Tulsa police and a citizen militia (legally deputized and given weapons by city officials as a temporary emergency measure) fought back against rioting gangs of African-Americans who did not want Rowland to be legally prosecuted for the crime he was accused of. During the riots, many homes and businesses of the Greenwood District in Tulsa were destroyed, an act modern liberal historians now try to blame on the police and militia. However, reports from the time indicate that police forces were only deployed to quell the violence, and that the majority of those killed in the first round of fire were in fact Whites.
There, now it's "objective", and anyone who disagrees with your implied version of events (or indeed calls you out for
what you're obviously implying about them) is a "hysterical Woke CRT" who wants to make innocent White children cry at the preschool. Why else would they demy history?