Cont: I don't think any historian should discount the word of a ranger captain completely. As an old Houston policeman Ransom probably knew more about Frank W.'s early life than Roland, you or I. Frank was described as a tall, cowboy hat wearing, Colt45 weilding special deputy to noted marshal/ future ranger W Hanson and noted sheriff/ MAN-HUNTER/ future ranger J Vann. Frank also murdered before Lamb. Ransom probably knew all this and warned the Sterlings. Frank threatend them and they reacted.
I am well aware of Frank Warnock's history. I don't need someone to tell me about my own family. Ransom "warning" them is pure conjecture on your part. I, and Roland, have great respect for the majority of the Rangers such as Red Burton, Bill McDonald, John Hughes and Capt. Wright. But the men in the Valley in 1915 were not of the same cloth. I say as much at the opening in my statement, if you care to read it again.
We will be screening BORDER BANDITS at the Border Theater in Mission, TX, on Saturday, Jan. 28th at 10 am and 6 pm. Come out and see this film screened where it took place!!!
I am not putting words in your mouth and I am not desperate.
The Ranger reports were deemed somewhat suspect by Mike Cox, head of PR for the Rangers (DPS) in our film, so they don't provide the best evidence.
If you listen to the film, you hear us say clearly that only a 'DNA test would prove conclusively if Diorica McAllen was the granddaughter of James B. McAllen.
@Pecos45 It sounded like it and I apologize if I misread your post. However you are misquoting Mike Cox, who also wasn't working for DPS, when your film came out in 04, but people make mistakes. He never said all ranger reports are SUSPECT in the film and I don't think I've ever heard him say or write such a bold and irresponsible statement about contemporary documents. He ONLY said that these reports are sometimes BRIEF or vague. You judge them on an individual basis not with blanket opinions.
He said that they are brief and vague so how can you hold them up as hard evidence?
Particularly since Captain Ransom omitted his killings of Bazan and Longoria in his report for that day. You are saying that your Ranger reports dispute Roland Warnock's eyewitness account, yet they omit things regularly.
Au contraire, Mike WAS working for the DPS when we filmed that interview. It was done in his office, at DPS headquarters, in Austin. So you are wrong again.
@Pecos45 Well, maybe when you interviewed him, but he wasn't there when the film came out years later. Look at his online resume, bio or email. I really think we must be talking between to 2 Fringe universes here as we seem to have different concepts on dates/ facts. Maybe we should end this discussion. BTW: I was wrong about your narrator saying that Sterling got his plaque in 1960. He actually mistates 65. Ransom was also killed in 1918, not 17 as your film states. I can admit my errors. Bye!
Yes, he was there when I interviewed him. How am I supposed to change film already in the can when the film is released? Once again, you just nibble at the edges but cannot dispute the facts that Mike Cox was the PR spokesman for the DPS when he made the statements in my film. Are you trying to say there were no "bad" Rangers ever? I'm not trashing the entire force, just the miscreants who wore the badge and brought dishonor to the star. You don't see that????
@Pecos45 So I'm finally correct? Now, he wasn't with DPS in 2004? He left in 2000, so your film was in the can 4 years? Hard to believe. All you had to do to be accurate was state that he was the former media director or heck simply identify him as a well-known ranger author.
How many times do I have to say it? There were numerous BAD rangers, but your film clearly depicts them all (especially w/ those MX Revolution photos) as MONSTERS. Few rangers had badges in 1915 for your information.
Hard to believe the interview was in the can for four years? Not if you are self funding your film. Obviously you've never produced one nor raised money for one. You shoot what you can afford, raise more money, then do what you can. Camera crews and editors don't work for free, unless you work for the government. Can't you tell that interview was shot in Mike's office at DPS headquarters? Or maybe you've never been there. I DO NOT depict all as monsters. Re-read my opening statement.
Why does when I shot that interview have any bearing on what he said? We shot it when he was head of PR for DPS, in his office in Austin. Call him up if you don't believe me.
But the fact remains, we have him on camera saying what he says. Relying on Ranger reports of the era are not good history, nor documentation because they left things (like killing someone.) Again, you don't refute his statement.
So that means he wasn't shot and killed by an unknown person as the autopsy states?
Fine, I can change the date, no problem. It still doesn't alter the facts of his demise.
Again, you just nibble at the edges without disproving anything. We'll be showing the film in Mission, TX on Feb. 25, where it all happened. Come see me sometime.
So, to sum it up, you've pointed out some typos on some dates. (They were off by one digit, because they were mis-typed into the script.) That's an easy fix. But how does a typo on a date disprove the points of my film? Does a mistaken 7 for an 8 on the death of Ransom mean that the Rangers didn't kill Bazan and Longoria? Again, you have offered no direct refutation of an eyewitness account, so you have nothing. See you in Mission, Feb. 25.
@Pecos45 You can't let it go, can you? You've made audio/ book/ docudrama. What's next a big film w/ Brad Pitt? I know, I know as a Texan and ranger buff, I can't possibly know as much about South TX/ rangers as you. Being part Indian/ Jewish and a vet, I can't be as sympathetic to the oppressed either. None of the doc's misinformation matters and all of the pics of piled-up MX Rev. KIAs were really murdered by evil 1915 genocidal rangers. I'm a moron and havn't refuted you, so let it lay. Bye.
And you still cannot provide anything to refute this film, except to point out that I was one digit off on a date...a typo. It has nothing to do with who you are, but your lack of direct refutation of an eyewitness, at the scene in 1915, whose story is recorded and transcribed at the oldest university in Texas. If you need me to get more photos of bodies piled up, that's easy. There are hundreds more photos in the Museum of South Texas and Texas A&M Kingsville. I stand by my story!
The problem is that my film is too politically incorrect for all the Ranger fans. Most of them cannot take history that is unpleasant, and my film is.
@PanVet100 So let's be clear. You are saying that these killings never happened and that a typo on a date proves they never happened? No Rangers in 1915 ever killed innocent American citizens in the Rio Grande Valley and there was not a mass transfer of land from Hispanic to Anglo?
@Pecos45 Hello. Again and again, where does Roland "specifically" make these accusations against civilian Sterling, rangers Ransom and West in your film and book? Also where does Sterling admit to being present for these murders in his biography? A time frame in the film and page numbers for the books will be appreciated. When can you post Roland's recordings here to back up his statements about naming names?
@PanVet100 Sterling says in his book on page 39 that he drove Captain Ransom and his Rangers to the McAllen Ranch. Of course he omits the killings of Bazan and Longoria as does Ransom from his Ranger report. There is no record of their murders, not ever a death certificate, even thought they were US. citziens. Roland Warnock names Ransom and Sterling in his oral history and the transcripts. I will gladly mail the transcripts to you if you will send an address.
@Pecos45 Wow! 10 responses in 18 hrs. My contemporary evidence, etc must've hit a nerve. I apologize for that. Im just responding to your questions/ statements in a disagreement that you reignited after a flameless year. Sterling places himself at McAllen's on the 24th, but says he then drove James B to Brownsville. He says NOTHING about chasing bandits or visiting Lane. There might be records, but so far as death certs. weren't they spotty w/ Anglos before 1920 too? Again, post the recordings!
Not hitting a nerve. I believe that your flimsy attempts at refuting my film need to be met with emphatically. You still have nothing concrete to refute the contentions in BORDER BANDITS, Ranger reports of that era are suspect and Bill Sterling omits his part in the murder of an Anglo, even though there are court records that he did it, so therefore how can you go by his word?
@Pecos45 Your deluge Monday and tone say otherwise, but I understand as I know writers/ directors sometimes get a bit heated when others opine on their work even when it's requested. Yes, my contemporary, primary and secondary data is not concrete, flimsy and suspect, but isn't it ironic that Roland's WORDS that the murders occurred the day after the McAllen raid led me to the 25th killings at the Lane Ranch. I don't beileve everything Stirling or anyone says, but when there's backup, I think.
Your "opines" deserve a deluge because I refuse to let flimsy evidence stand. Once again, I have primary evidence (an eyewitness). Where there is documentation (the Sterling-Warnock killing) it bears out my eyewitness. The lack of death certificates for Bazan and Longoria (American citizens) speaks volumes, as does the omission of their deaths from Ranger reports and Sterling's bio. A flimsy attack or a half truth must be met with vociferously. You still have nothing substantial.
@Pecos45 Flimsy, half truths or unsubstantial, Roland is still my best witness with his Sept. 25th date, which lines up with Baker's presence at the Lane Ranch and two Mexican deaths on that day.
Your "sources" are all suspect, due to Mike Cox's on camera interview, plus the fact that almost all of those Rangers from 1915 were appointed by a corrupt Democratic governor. Even Walter Prescott Webb says most were "unfit for service." But again, you produce nothing to directly refute eyewitness testimony. Plus there was a huge land transfer taking place in the Valley then and Rangers then were in on it. I don't see anything you've posted having value and where's the documents?
@Pecos45 I know they're suspect because they disagree with your theories. I'm also a terrible researcher and I don't know anything about the rangers. I agree, there were MANY bad ones, especially in 1915. I think the main problem the museums, rangers, history buffs and others have with the film is that you don't have ONE GOOD WORD to say about the rangers. Your film ONLY depicts them as Hollywood stereotypes, mass murders, back shooters, sinners, etc. and you compare them to the KKK and Nazis.
Roland specifically named Sterling in his oral histories. We did not use them in the finished film because they did not lend themselves to a linear narrative, but I have the recordings and the transcripts as does Baylor University. Sterling admits to being at the McAllen Ranch in his biography but omits the killings. How do you respond to Sterling leaving out the killing of Frank Warnock from his biography? It happened, but he insists he never killed anyone. What does that say?
@Pecos45 Well, most folks haven't HEARD his oral statements on their presence. They're also linearally edited from the book and borderbanditscom piece, Trouble on the Border. I don't see where the accusations are made anywhere, but here. Stirlings' bio is clearly directed to rangers, family and friends, not old enemies. Half is only about his favorite rangers, outlaws, etc. Frank W. probably wasn't deemed LINEAR either. Did Frank ever admit to, write about or receive punishment for his murders?
So what do you say about Sterling writing in his book that he never killed a man? Yet there is documented proof he did? What does that say about his veracity? Unlike Bazan and Longoria, there is a detailed paper trail the Sterling DID shoot an unarmed man in the back. It's not a sore spot, it is the documented proof to cement everything Roland Warnock said about that killing. Because the other victims were Mexican Americans, there is no paper trail there. What do you say to that?
@Pecos45 Man, you must hate biographies/ history. I've read many books that were full of lies. Ranger bios are often the worst and Stirling comes nowhere near the biggest liar among rangers. As an old soldier, I've heard men brag about war/ conflict/ death, while others are utterly silent. Some say it shows the 2 sides of post-traumatic stress. I've seen men, women and children die in the most horrible ways and I've tried to forget their names. Where does Roland say L & B were shot in the back?
@PanVet100 On the contrary, I using Sterling's bio to discredit your contention. He states plainly he never killed a man, while court records and arrest warrants show otherwise. Sterling shot Frank Warnock in the back. Frank was married and a father of three, hardly a desperado. He got angry when someone cut off his water and had a gun in his hand. He did wrong, but he wasn't an outlaw. You provide suspect reports, a person with problems with the truth as a source, and no eyewitnesses.
@Pecos45 And I'm simply contending that Frank W. also killed people, didn't admit it in print like Stirling and got away with it until his threats went wrong. I didn't say he was a desperado/ outlaw, but he did have a reputation going back to Guadalupe Co. and Houston. Did the victims of his anger have wives and children? It seems real hypocritical to put him on a pedestal above his killer. Even Ranson said Frank W. was a bad man, which at least implies that he was no angel. it was a tough era.
Bill Sterling said in print that he "never killed a man" which is different than not admitting it. (Lie?) Frank was no saint, but he was not the "bad man" portrayed by some. He got angry and had a gun in his hand. A bad combination. I don't defend him, but he was awaiting trial when he was shot in the back while unarmed. The difference between killing an Anglo or a Mexican back then was that at least they had a sham trial when they killed an Anglo (IMHO).
@Pecos45 Sterling was old, a ranger and veteran, who are prone to brag, lie and omit details in BIOs, I get it !! What's your excuse for errors in the film? I really didn't want to get into your family's 100 yr old Sterling grudge as it has little to do with the L & B deaths. You sure know how to sugar-coat Frank W's murders, while adding salt to others. Roland makes Lamb's murder while driving a wagon sound more like a premeditated ambush, but I'm no lawyer. Yes, There were racial differences.
@PanVet100 Continuing: You have provided no conclusive evidence, just opinion and conjecture. You have no defense for Sterling who is caught dead to right in a lie ("I never killed a man") and no other defense except to attack me personally. Worse, you are some anonymous poster on a YouTube site while I put my name, my money and my evidence out there. You may believe what you wish but so far I have primary evidence and the court papers to prove it.
@PanVet100 And for the record, I like biographies, I just don't care for fantasy.
(BTW, I hold a degree in history from the oldest university in Texas and have the papers to prove it.) So I love history. I just don't care for mythology which is seeing ourselves the way we wish we were. History is how we really are.
@Pecos45 Well, I sit corrected. I love history and fantasy, but well-defined. I recall your schooling from the oldest one as you've related it before. I've politely given you my detailed opinions/ evidence, but I dont think I've attacked you personally. You've chosen to be offended because it's easier than proving me wrong. Yes, I'm anonymous here, but so are you Pecos. My name is out there too as an actual ranger researcher and you mailed me a free DVD because you stated you wanted my opinion.
Frank was awaiting trial for his killing, but died before it could happen. But back to Sterling's bio. Why does he write that he never killed a man when we know he did? Lying? Cowardice? Lack of character? That makes all of his other statements suspect.
@Pecos45 Boy, you're all questions and no answers. Nice diversion, but I said murderS, which is plural. I also asked if he ever WROTE about them. So what if Stirling was a lying coward w/ no character. It's not like he's among the great rangers or a Hall of Famer. There are no statues, books (other than his own) or films on him. Oh, wait there's yours. I rarely heard about Stirling or Ransom until your film. Pat Goodrich was even inspired to write an awful lauditory bio about that thug, Ransom.
On the contrary, there is a shrine to Bill Sterling in the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame in Waco and a historical marker to his name in Corpus Christi. (And it's spelled "Sterling" with an "e"
@Pecos45 Big deal. He has a window/ grave plaque. They weren't given for killing Mexicans and Frank W before he became a ranger. How many people have Hamer and others killed before/ after they were rangers? So you caught me misspelling Stirlings' name. Bravo! If only you had displayed that attention to detail in your film. BTW: Stirling was given that plaque in '69 and not '60 as the narrator states. Ransom was also killed accidentally in the hotel hall and not assasinated in bed. Two of many!
@Pecos45 Transcripts of Roland's voice recordings would only be secondary evidence and no more valuable than his statements in your Texas Cowboy book, which I bought many years ago. If you really want to put Roland's primary evidence out there, then place his recordings on You Tube as a companion to the Border Bandits documentary. Primary evidence only trumps contemporary and secondary proof when it is accurate.
You've only provided anecdotal evidence, ,telling me you're "talked to people" or "read some reports."
As to Santos Tijerina, a DNA test could settle this argument conclusively.
I don't find anything you've mentioned (and I've yet to see any copies of anything you say you've seen) to refute our general contention, which is that Bazan and Longoria were killed by Rangers after an attempted revenge killing on James B McAllen went bad.
@Pecos45 I've given more than anecdotal proof. I can't help it if you ignore it while others embrace it. Sometimes the Jefferson DNA card is just a last resort when one can't prove a theory with documents. Would it even prove paternity w/o a sample from James B.? Santos should have gotten a birth cert. after Willie's birth. She also should have put James B's middle initial and correct birth year. They were probably shot at by rangers, but not the ones you want. It was a failed stock/ ammo raid.
Sorry, but my grandfather was very specific that the McAllen ranch raid was over a girl. He told me he was the last man left alive that knew this, and that he didn't want it revealed until after his death. I know you want to believe that it's not so, but you are incorrect.
Do you have a problem admitting there were "bad" Rangers back then?
@Pecos45 No problem, but many historians/ history buffs have heard the last man standing defence before. It's not evidence and doesn't strengthen your
film's case. Roland's story isn't even controversial enough to hide for years. A Mexican girl lived in a wealthy Hispanic rancher's house and some innocent Mexicans were killed by Texas law officers. No shock! This would barely make the papers back in the early 19th Century. As I've said MANY TIMES before, there were GOOD, BAD and UGLY rangers.
Then where is your primary evidence to refute this? You provide only Ranger reports (which we know are suspect) and what some of your contacts believe. So who are you saying killed Bazan and Longoria? Do you have someone else at the scene who committed these killings???
@Pecos45 Of course we've gone over this before in PM, but you may have deleted them because they're suspect. As I stated last year, your so-called hitmen were tracked from the Palpa, Monte Cristo, McAllen, Longoria and Guadalupe (Lane) ranches by cavalrymen, sheriffs and rangers 23-27, while they robbed these places for cattle, horses, arms and ammo, but didn't catch them. Sheriff AY Baker's posse (2 deputies,3 rangers) arrived at Lane's on the 25th & spent the night, which fits Roland's story.
Except that Roland Warnock names Ransom and Sterling as being present at the killings of Bazan and Longoria because he was an eyewitness. Again, eyewitness testimony is what I have. Perhaps you can produce your own documentary if you feel this needs addressing. I have put my evidence out there and so far you have Ranger reports that are suspect, plus they wrote their own 'alibis.' Nice.
@Pecos45 Actually, Roland states that some non-descript Ransom rangers (and prob. Baker & 2 deputies) came to the Lane Ranch the NIGHT (24th) of the McAllen raid when the moon was FULL and went to sleep, hoping to catch the bandits at nearby ranches. He says that Bazan and Longoria were killed the day AFTER the McAllen attack, then buried a couple days later. Longoria's marker states he died on the 24th and Bazan's 29th death is certainly a typo. Yes, I know ALL alibis and reports are suspect!!
@Pecos45 You're putting words in my mouth which is a sign of despiration to prove I'm wrong. I never said these men weren't killed and repeatedly stated they were murdered. You have a 60 year old tale, but it's not the best evidence. I have contemporary, primary, secondary evidence and a consistent chronology that leads me to a different conclusion on the event. Roland was wrong about the age of the unamed girl/ relationship and the film was wrong about the age/ relationship of Santos Tijerena.
@Pecos45 Actually Roland doesn't say how old she was. He also doesn't name her, state she had an affair w/ McAllen or say that the GIRL was present in the fight. I think he meant to say that the WOMAN (cook), not the girl, helped McAllen. This falls in line with the primary and secondary statements of Stirling, McAllen and contemporary papers that name AGRAS (the cook) as the heroine. Tijerena's parents were also long-time neighbors at the Santa Anita Ranch, not murder bosses living in Mexico.
the statement about Sterling being there and being one of the trigger men is in my grandfather's oral history, on tape, and the transcripts. So, I have an eyewitness, at the scene.
@Pecos45 Since you refuse to answer my questions on the placement of Stirling and Ransom at the murder scene in the film, book and the Stirling bio, can I assume that this info was strangely omitted from these things? Primary testimony is great data to have a day/ week/ year/ decade after an event, but memories fade. Roland's weren't recorded until 60 years after the event and he wasn't always accurate. They aren't any better than the "contemporary", primary and secondary statements of others.
Both Ransom and Sterling place themselves at the murder scene through their "reports" and Sterling's book, but they leave out the actual killings. My late grandfather was an eyewitness to these killings and names names. He first told me this story when I was a 5-year-old boy, so he wasn't yet 60, and quite frankly I don't see how that matters.
@Pecos45 I thought 1915 reports were suspect. If you had shown a wider view of Ransom and Edds reports in the film, they would reveal to the audience that they actually give themselves alibis for your date of the murders. They left Edinberg on the 28th scouting west, visiting Monte Cristo, La Gloria, Jarachinas, Pinto ranches, then down to Los Ebanos, which is corraborated by Ransom rangers Baker, Glick and Brunner. No mention is made of ranger advocate Sam Lane's ranch. Sorry decades matter.
Why does Bill Sterling say in his book that he "never wounded a man fatally" during his entire service on the border? My film shows his bail bond and trial transcripts for the killing of Frank Warnock. If he omits the killing of an unarmed Anglo, it would be nothing to omit his killing two unarmed Mexican Americans. How do you explain his omission of the Warnock killing? It has documentation to prove it happened. Does that speak to his character???
What does it say about Sterling that he would rise to the rank of Adjutant General, but hide the killing of Frank Warnock from his biography and even insist he never killed a man? You seem to want "history" to fit your preconceived notion of "good" and "bad." The Rangers ARE good, but they had some "bad" players in 1915, and they were very bad. Why is that so hard to accept? Do you find Sterling exemplary, or a coward?
@Pecos45 Not a lot since Stirling didn't RISE to the rank of AG, which isn't a position in the rangers as you state in the film. He didn't rise from Pvt-Sgt-Lt-Capt, then the highest rank of Sr Capt as you imply. He was politically made Capt and AG. He didn't need to HIDE killing Frank W. to cronies as he was judged innocent and it was public record. F. Hamer was one of the toughest/ deadliest, but is one of the most famous. Stirling was no worse a killer than Frank W. and WASN'T a 1915 ranger.
So Sterling was a political appointee (I already knew that). What does that say about his character? He doesn't HIDE any killing, but says "I never killed a man." That's not HIDING that's something else. F. Hamer never said, "I never killed a man." Big difference. Sterling's truthfulness is questionable, as is his record. Most reputable historians don't think much of him.
@Pecos45 So, why imply that he rose in the ranks with hero or merit promotions as others did? It obviously says Stirling was politically savy unlike most rangers and in the wrong jobs. I agree, Hamer and Stirling were two different men w/ different life experiences and reactions. I also think Stirling may have "LIED" or "FORGOT" that he didn't drive Ransom to McAllen's on the 24th. Ransom apparently visited sick ranger Reneau at Kingsville on the 23d, then went to his Harlingen HQ on the 24th.
@Pecos45 I don't think you understand. I never said that I was a fan of Sterling, Ransom or any of the rangers of 1915, but I'm a fanatic for truth. I agree these men and many rangers had clay feet, but that doesn't mean that mud should be slung at them as murderers, when the evidence doesn't exactly stick to them. I've actually met many of my heroes in Collin Powell, Medal of Honor winner Roy Benavidez, TX Ranger Ray Martinez, Elmer Kelton, actor Robert Duvall, etc. but know we all have flaws.
Did Colin Powell, Roy Benavidez, Ray Martinez shoot an unarmed 67-year-old man in the back? NO! They are of entirely different character than Ransom, Sterling, or A. Y. Baker (one of the most corrupt men in the Valley.)
@Pecos45 I completely agree. Powell, Benavidez and Martinez are polar opposites from those killers, but I don't get why you're comparing them. Ray and those great soldiers don't even belong in the same paragraph.
Thank you. I appreciate your support for a counter documentary. I've assisted on a few ranger books, articles, documentaries, etc. Presently, I'm helping a director w/ a film on a real bad ass ranger, who killed dozens of people and makes Stirling and Ransom look like choir boys.
I have the transcripts from the oral history tapes where Roland Warnock names Sterling. He names Ransom in the film and the book. Sterling says in his book that he drove Ransom and other Rangers to the McAllen Ranch, but he omits the killings of Bazan and Longoria.
So, I have an eyewitness, who has a recorded and transcribed testimony that places Sterling and Ransom at the scene as the killers.
What do you have?
(PS If you want me to mail you copies of the transcripts I will do so.)
@Pecos45 What part of the film you sent me, my copies of your book and Stirling's bio contains the statements (pg #s) that they were present for the murders of these poor men? I think I've asked a few times now. How can one admit to a crime if they weren't there and the date of the crime isn't exact. I showed this case to a DPS detective last year and he said you could never get a conviction on such flimsy evidence today, especially when there's so many discrepancies on when the crime occurred.
Is this available on Netflix or anything? My Grandfather was Willie McAllen, whose mother was Santos Tijerina, whose family lived at the Santa Anita Ranch for many years. Please get back to me when you get a chance, thanks!
@ssgtolivarez Do a google search for border bandits movie and we will come up first. We have a PayPal order form on the site. Just scroll down. I can't post a hyperlink on YouTube. They won't allow it.
The director informed me recently that he is once again screening his 2004 documentary Border Bandits. It will be showing TOMORROW, Jan. 7th at the TEXAS THEATER in DALLAS and he encourages all doubters to attend, where he will supposedly answer all questions on his evidence. I think I've posted a few good ones below, but please give this old soldier some credit. Adios.
Roland Warnock never personally says in the book or film that rangers Ransom, West or civilian W. Sterling were present for the murders on the 27th. There's contemporary evidence from the reports of Brunner and Glick that they scouted with Ransom between Duval Co. and Los Ebanos from the 26-30th, which gives Ransom an alibi for the 27th. The reports of Ransom rangers Baker, Dubose, Anders and Bills actually place them at the death site with A.Y. Baker's posse on the 25th when the moon was full.
You are INCORRECT. Roland Warnock names Sterling as being there for the murders and Sterling even says so in his book, but he omits the killings. Ranger reports from that era were notorious for leaving things out.
@Pecos45 Well, I'm sometimes wrong about things, but rarely incorrect with my meticulous research. It's been a year since my last post on this topic and when you didn't respond I thought you wanted to let dead men rest. Where does Roland's voice make this specific claim in your film and on what page of your book? Where does Sterling admit witnessing this crime in his bio? Ranger reports are sometimes vague, but that doesn't change the other inconsistencies with this allegedly true tale, retold.
Another problem is time. The film implies Bazan and Longoria were killed by Capt. Ransom's rangers (w/Sterling) on Sept. 27,1915 near Lane's Ranch and was buried on the 29th. The date is contentious because Bazan's stone says he died on the 29th, while his family says he died on the 26th. Grave records for Longoria show he died on the 24th, while his family says he died on the 26th. Roland Warnock stated the moon was full before the murder, which places the date closer to the 25th time period.
@Pecos45 If it doesn't fit, you must acquit, but it's such an old story now. Either Roland was wrong about the date, the moon or the murderers, but you can't have him correct on everything. I showed my evidence to TX Rangers and the MX Revolution authors Harris & Sadler at a Hall of Fame event (saw your name on an unused nametag) last year and they thought my evidence was good. I just don't think the whole story has been told on this tragic event despite your valiant efforts to find the truth.
Let me meet with the folks at the Ranger Hall of Fame and lay out my evidence and I think they'll come to a different conclusion, although they don't want to admit it. They look at this as an attack on the entire Ranger force, and it is not. It is just a revelation about a group of Rangers in a certain time period who did some bad things. This doesn't attack the entire Ranger force and I say so plainly at the beginning.
@Pecos45 Do so, but I doubt it would change their minds. How do you expect them to take it as anything, but an attack? Look how it's been printed up in the papers after your events. I met a guy at the Ranger Museum (not affiliated w/ Waco's) in S.A. and he had gone to a Central Texas showing. He told me that he hated the way it invoked the ranger history/ myth through Hollywood, then revoked it by repeatedly (10 or 12 times) denigrating the rangers as back-shooters of unarmed, innocent people.
I am very specific that my documentary is not an attack on the entire Ranger force, particularly by our opening. How come folks admit that that there are "bad cops" but never "bad Rangers"??? Why hasn't there ever been a SERPICO produced on the Rangers?
@Pecos45 Nobody remembers disclaimers unless it's catchy like Dragnet. They recall what they see/ hear in a film. Sometimes they never forget it. You're film isn't as biased as I was initially told with Draper, Cox and Graham, but it's certainly spun to Hispanic audiences. My S.A. friend, who is Hispanic, didn't like it, but he's fond of pointing out (which you do not) that there were many Mexican, Indian and a few black rangers. There's never been an accurate ranger film on a good one either.
@PanVet100 I understand (some) of their consternation. It's like learning that the Lone Ranger and Tonto were gay, but the truth is the truth. Not all history is neat and pretty like a John Wayne western.
Also, why did James B McAllen pay Bill Sterling's bail after Sterling killed Frank Warnock? Tit for tat for rubbing out Bazan and Longoria? You don't find that interesting? Again, we have firm documentation on Sterling's murder of Frank Warnock, so there's no disputing it happened the way Roland describes it. The jury just pulled an O.J.
@Pecos45 I really didn't want to get into the Warnock/ Sterling feud since it didn't involve rangers/ bandits and is a 100 year old sore spot with your family. I guess you really want to talk about it. I reckon McAllen paid his bail because they were friends and he was a good driver. Are you saying that McAllen hired him to kill his neighbors, Longoria/ Bazan? I've never disputed that the Stirlings killed F. Warnock, but how is this like OJ. Did Nicole kill one of OJ's workers and threaten him?
McAllen didn't hire Sterling (obviously) but I find it interesting he paid Sterling's bail. The trial was like OJ because it was obvious Sterling killed an unarmed man but the jury let him off. But because there is a paper trail, it shows that Sterling was untruthful about his past, therefore untruthful about other things.
@Pecos45 Thank God, w/ your contract killers, ranger murder, Warnock trial conspiracies, I don't think I could take another one. Well, you obviously know it wasn't as simple as killing an unarmed man. Frank Warnock was a man with a reputation for violence. He had recently threatened his former employers, the Stirlings and 2 of their workers. He actually murdered 1 unarmed man. Old rangers (as others do) sometimes lie, forget and exaggerate in their biographies, but that's why we have historians
@Pecos45 I would give you one or two days, but the dates given from the 24th until 29th is actually almost a week. Obviously, my point is that we don't know exactly when these murders occurred, so one has to pick one of six dates that makes sense. Roland said the moon was full, so I lean toward the 25th.
Santos Tijerena is depicted in the film as James B. McAllen's 14 year old concubine, savior and mother of McAllen's alleged child Willie. An obscured birth certificate for Willie is displayed in the film with comments by Willie's daughter as proof of a secret affair. The trouble with this scenario is that the document shows that Tijerena was 29 in 1915, Willie was born legitimate in 1908 and the named James McAllen's middle initial is absent and his age is wrong for James B. McAllen's true age.
I had some nice private talks with the producer/ poster of this film. As I've said it's not as one-sided as I thought, but it has flaws. Almost all of the pics of dead bandits/ Tejanos shown in the film as RANGER ATROCITIES are not what they seem. The stacked dead by the cart and logs were taken by R. Runyon after a 1913 Matamoros battle in Mexico. Most of the remaining pics of bandit dead are from fights with U.S.Troops at Norias, Texas and Columbus, New Mexico and were not killed by RANGERS.
If you listen closely to the interview with Dr. Richard Ribb of the University of Texas, he states that killings were also done by outraged posses and vigilantes.
Well, I received the docudrama and enjoyed it very much. The writing, history, photos, expert interviews, film/ book/ TV media, etc. were very interesting. The production quality of the DVD is better than expected and it translated well to my big flat screen. The docudrama is also not as lop-sided as I was led to believe with the addition of interviews by ranger authors Don Graham and Mike Cox. The overall story of the bloody war between Mexicans, Anglos and Tejanos on the border is well done.
There are other elements to this story that are in the full film, particularly the fact that Mr. McAllen was keeping a 14-year-old Hispanic girl in his home, which sparked the so-called "bandit" raid on his ranch. Again, this is a complex story that does not lend itself to a simple narrative.
It's on the way. All questions to be answered. I would ask that you send me a personal e-mail with your comments/questions so we can unclog the comments board.
BTW: My research shows that many of those ranchers kept "casa chicas," that were called "maids."
Okay, I 'll wait. I guess it's the Xmas mail. By "unclog" the comments do you mean delete? I've seen vids here that have 20 pages of meaningless, vicious or just plain silly posts, so your board doesn't seem very clogged.
As a soldier and refugee Maria de Agras doesn't appear to fit the mold of a concubine. The1915 news accounts and most witness testimony depict her as a brave woman loading the deadly weapons of a heroic McAllen. Also her husband seems to have been a ranch resident.
@Pecos45 Well, I made that statement a year ago before I saw your complete documentary and after I thought you were implying that this brave Mexican lady (Maria de Agras) was a 14 year old casa chica of McAllen. It wasn't until, I saw your film that I relealized that the 14 year old girl you were referencing was really 30 year old ranch worker Santos Tijerena. I don't consider either lady a concubine or casa chica and was only responding to your statements on their supposed living arrangements.
One thing some people might not realize. The border was a war zone at this time as it is now with the drug cartels. Some bad events may have instigated Ransom's probable murders of Bazan/ Longoria. In preceding weeks bandits and insurrectionists wrecked trains, burned down schools/ bridges, killed rangers, Anglos, Hispanics and kids, etc. They also beheaded a soldier and gave his ears away as trophies. Afterward they displayed his head on a pole. The corrupt governor/ courts also played a role.
We cover all of that in the full film. Mr. Bazan was a 67-year-old man, American citiizen, and long-time neighbor of the McAllens and Lanes. He was unarmed and shot in the back. I don't believe that "war zone" justifies killing old men who have done nothing, and are known to local law enforcement. Watch the entire film and then give me your commments.
I'm sure you do, but I thought I would give a perspective here of the brutality on both sides of the so-called Bandit War. I never meant to imply that the murder was justified because of the conflict, only that it may have "set" Ransom off on a rampage beyond his orders from Gov.Ferguson. War is hell and civilians are usually the biggest victims, but they seldom get any real justice. I've seen war and I've seen innocents killed, but I would go crazy if I were to dwell on it too long.
There was much more than "some bad events" and not everyone the Rangers killed were "bandits." Hundreds were American citizens of Mexican descent who had lived here for 100 years. They were killed for their land and called "bandits." It is all documented in the film, and at the courthouse. It was not "collateral damage" but a perfect storm of corrupt Rangers, a land boom and a Revolution in Mexico. (How come folks accept "bad cops" but not "bad Rangers?")
Sorry to be a stickler for contemporary facts, especially on here. I'm still kind of new to YT. I see some are less polite and intelligent than we are. Back to Sterling. He mentions bandits crossing the river at Los Ebanos after the Norias Raid, but I don't see where this town is mentioned elsewhere. Sterling states on p. 48 that he "only" accompanied Ransom on 2 scouts after bandits. It appears in his narrative that these trips were to the Santa Anita and McAllen ranches. Check your pm. Later.
Capt. Ransom was a racist and an bullying dog, but I don't think his company was the prolific death squad that's been portrayed. They seem to do a lot of patrolling, arresting a few Mexicans/ Anglos and apparently killing more off the record. His company consisted mostly of young rookies and old cronies from his days as the murderous police chief of Houston before he was given the boot. Ransom's 1915 unit was far from elite or adequate as most were fired within a month or two of joining him.
Omission doesn't equate to admission, but understand your passion for the film. Sterling says that he drove to San Juanito, then took McAllen southeast. McAllen's Sept 26 presence (Amberson, McAllen p 486) in Brownsville lends credence to Sterling's claim. Eight rangers also failed to name Sterling as a member of the Sept. 22-30 scout to NW Hidalgo, but name the notorious A.Y. Baker. So Sterling is included in the '73 recording, but not the book? Still skeptical, but I may take your free film.
Wow! Five responses to my post yesterday. Nothing is certain without 1915 first person accounts or primary documents, but they're not always available. Time blurs history, but I deal with contemporary sources in my research. It has served me well in getting to the truth of an event. I've never disputed that Sterling coldly killed Warnock and don't believe Sterling ever denied it. Many lawmen, frontiersman, soldiers and others omit killings from their bios, some add or leave out whole battles.
The witness is my late grandfather. He saw the killings, then buried the two men. He told his story to Baylor's oral history program in 1973 before his death. Ransom makes no mention of the killings in his Ranger report for that day. They are mentioned in a new history of the McAllen Ranch. The other point is that Sterling says in his book that "I never had to wound a man fatally," yet we have arrest warrants, trial transcripts and bail bond for his killing an Anglo in 1915.
So you're the director? I believe your book Texas Cowboy transcribed the 73 recordings. In this wonderful book Roland Warnock states that an unnamed captain (certainly Ransom) and rangers drove up to the Lane ranch in Model Ts and killed Bazan and Longoria. No mention is made of Sterling and his Dodge at the scene. Ransom was a hired killer that followed few laws and his reports are sparse. However, none of the other ranger's reports note army scout Sterling's assistance in September.
My grandfather said that Sterling was in the car, and Sterling mentioned that he drove Ransom and the Rangers to the McAllen Ranch. He then drove them to Los Ebanos, and back to the Guadalupe Ranch where they slept on the porch until they shot Bazan and Longoria. Ransom's report tells where they went, but he doesn't say anything about killing Bazan and Longoria, but my grandfather saw it all, and it is on tape.
A nice one-sided account with some skewed facts. Bill Sterling wasn't a Texas ranger at the time of this unfortunate incident and there's no evidence that he was even present. It would have been helpful if the author had some contemporary documentation on this event instead of hearsay years after the fact. I guess it doesn't matter if one wants to trash the whole ranger service. Carry on Texas bashers.
Unfortunately you are incorrect. Bill Sterling proudly claimed that he was the man driving the car when Bazan and Longoria were killed in his autobiography, Trails and Trials of a Texas Ranger. I have documentation and eyewitness testimony. Bill Sterling applied for a Special Ranger commission at the time and later became Adjutant General, after earning a Captain's rank when he contributed to Dan Moody's election campaign. All of this is documented in the full film, no hearsay.
Well, it sounds like creative film making, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, though the names A. Longoria and J. Bazan don't appear in the index of Sterling's tendentious bio. What page is it on? An application or recommendation doesn't actually make you a ranger or even a janitor. It's the actual employment or commission for a service. Sterling was apparently a U.S. army scout at this time and a wannabee ranger, but doesn't appear on ranger rolls. Where is this document?
In the FULL FILM (not the trailer) we say that Sterling killed three people before he became a full Ranger (under Dan Moody). We have his application for a Special Ranger which we show in the film. In his book he doesn't mention the killing of Bazan and Longoria but says he drive the car carrying Henry Ransom to the McAllen Ranch. An eyewitness saw him and the other Rangers shoot and kill the two men. He leaves that part out of his book, but places himself at the scene.
I haven't seen the whole thing, but I have seen parts, the book and stories on the film. Yes, Sterling killed an unknown number of people in the years before he became a Texas ranger, but he wasn't convicted of murder and these unfortunate deaths don't mean that he killed Bazan and Longoria. Sterling said (pg 39-42) that he drove the rangers in his new Dodge to McAllen's ranch on the 24th, then took McAllen to Brownsville. He doesn't place himself at Lane's ranch. Who's the witness?
He also shot and killed an unarmed Franklin Warnock in the back on the streets of Mission. He leaves this out of his bio, too, but we have the arrest warrant, bail bond and trial transcripts in the film. None of this is in Sterling's book either.
Sterling definitely killed Warnock. I'm not saying it was justified, but wasn't this murder in retribution for Warnock killing an unarmed Sterling employee over water rights? I don't particularly like Sterling as he didn't do any hard ranger service and was something of a dandy. People always add/ omit vital information in their biographies to make themselves look good. Why would a Sterling be any different? He was no Jack Hays and was almost forgotten in the Texas ranger pantheon.
PS We showed the film at the Bob Bullock Museum in Austin last May. Special guest was Tony Leal, Chief of the Texas Rangers. He took part in a panel discussion and had no issues with our facts. That's what I got, what do you have?
I love the Bullock Museum and I've visited many times, but I sadly missed this film event. Initially, I wasn't aware that you were affiliated with this documentary and really didn't mean to offend you with my earlier comments. I've met Senior Captain Leal and many others, but mostly retired rangers. They're great lawmen and investigators, however few are true historians. Still everyone has a right to their opinions on the storied Texas rangers and other subjects.
OK, because Bill Sterling writes in his autobiography that he WAS present at the time of the killings of Bazan and Longoria, I have his own words placing him there. What do you have to refute this evidence?
I'm sorry, that just doesn't sound like the flamboyant Gen. Sterling I've read about. Admitting to participating in the terrible murders of two Mexican civilians in a biography that was meant to portray himself as a heroic fighter for justice even before he became a Texas ranger. Of course the governor's hired thug Henry Ransom would have been proud of killing these Tejano men. I guess I mostly have a lack of evidence that Sterling was present without some contemporary proof. Later.
He was an old man on the precipice of death and passed away a few months after publication. He wasn't the first author, Texan or ranger to stretch the truth or conveniently omit information. Texas was a vast and unforgiving frontier unlike no other. Horrific events occurred during the MX Revolution and the spillover war on the US border that are sometimes forgotten. Sterling may have been a liar and border hothead, but that doesn't make him one of the killers of Bazan and Longoria.
No can say with certainty who pulled the trigger and ended their lives, but he was in the car that drove by and shot them in the back. They were unarmed and Bazan was a 67-year old man. But it is a proven fact that he shot an unarmed Frank Warnock in the back on the streets of Mission, was arrested and underwent a murder trial. Now how he conveniently forgot that fact and wrote that he never killed a man is a bit puzzling, don't you think? Shooting an unarmed man in the back???
Again, you are attempting to get me to describe a one-hour film in a comments section on a Web site. I will send you a copy of the film at no charge and you can see exactly what we put out there. I stand by everything in it, as it is all vetted by eyewitness testimony or documentation. Shooting an unarmed man in the back and claiming you never killed anyone isn't "stretching the truth or conveniently omitting information." What would you call it?
It is very important for me to point out that in the FULL FILM we state plainly that "no one can say with certainty who pulled the trigger and ended the lives of Bazan and Longoria," but according to eyewitness testimony (and Bill Sterling's book and Captain Ransom's report) the men in the car that day were Bill Sterling, Henry Ransom and Paul West. So what's incorrect about that?
Of course we NEVER learn about these things in school but we learn about how the Blacks were treated. We should demand that our sad history should be shown in today's history books so people can know how our ancestors were treated. We want the truth!
@michael85225 As someone told me, you start talking to a black person and in 10 minutes they will tell you about slavery. You start talking to a Jewish person and in 10 minutes they will tell you about the Holocaust. But if you talk to a Hispanic, what's their story????
Not the Hispanics, the Mexican-Americans (Chicanos) stories. Let's see in the 1960s we were treated as second class citizens in our schools which led to the Chicano walkouts, but of course they won't tell you about that in school. Or how about how thousands of our people were wrongfully deported during Operation Wetback and other immigration sweeps just because they were of Mexican descent.
....Or what about the Zoot Suit riots, in which many Chicanos were beaten and raped. These are just some of the stories that people refuse to believe. Do you honestly think that Black people were the only people treated unfairly in the USA?
There are hundreths of stories like these in south texas... even in wikipedia you can find a few of the more recorded ones in texas history... some where dozens of mexicans where killed by so called Texas Rangers who half the time weren't even from Texas...
there should be justice for these innocent 2 men that were shot the most horrific cowardly way by Texas Rangers. who supposedly are there to protect and abide by the law.. where is the justice...
this show is right the rinches rangers were nothing but killers an rapests. they should be disband.
SouthTejas101 1 week ago
Cont: I don't think any historian should discount the word of a ranger captain completely. As an old Houston policeman Ransom probably knew more about Frank W.'s early life than Roland, you or I. Frank was described as a tall, cowboy hat wearing, Colt45 weilding special deputy to noted marshal/ future ranger W Hanson and noted sheriff/ MAN-HUNTER/ future ranger J Vann. Frank also murdered before Lamb. Ransom probably knew all this and warned the Sterlings. Frank threatend them and they reacted.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
I am well aware of Frank Warnock's history. I don't need someone to tell me about my own family. Ransom "warning" them is pure conjecture on your part. I, and Roland, have great respect for the majority of the Rangers such as Red Burton, Bill McDonald, John Hughes and Capt. Wright. But the men in the Valley in 1915 were not of the same cloth. I say as much at the opening in my statement, if you care to read it again.
Pecos45 1 month ago
We will be screening BORDER BANDITS at the Border Theater in Mission, TX, on Saturday, Jan. 28th at 10 am and 6 pm. Come out and see this film screened where it took place!!!
Ride to the sound of the guns, boys!!!
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45
Just got word that the screening is postponed in Mission. Will reschedule for late February.
Pecos45 1 month ago
I am not putting words in your mouth and I am not desperate.
The Ranger reports were deemed somewhat suspect by Mike Cox, head of PR for the Rangers (DPS) in our film, so they don't provide the best evidence.
If you listen to the film, you hear us say clearly that only a 'DNA test would prove conclusively if Diorica McAllen was the granddaughter of James B. McAllen.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 It sounded like it and I apologize if I misread your post. However you are misquoting Mike Cox, who also wasn't working for DPS, when your film came out in 04, but people make mistakes. He never said all ranger reports are SUSPECT in the film and I don't think I've ever heard him say or write such a bold and irresponsible statement about contemporary documents. He ONLY said that these reports are sometimes BRIEF or vague. You judge them on an individual basis not with blanket opinions.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
He said that they are brief and vague so how can you hold them up as hard evidence?
Particularly since Captain Ransom omitted his killings of Bazan and Longoria in his report for that day. You are saying that your Ranger reports dispute Roland Warnock's eyewitness account, yet they omit things regularly.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Au contraire, Mike WAS working for the DPS when we filmed that interview. It was done in his office, at DPS headquarters, in Austin. So you are wrong again.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Well, maybe when you interviewed him, but he wasn't there when the film came out years later. Look at his online resume, bio or email. I really think we must be talking between to 2 Fringe universes here as we seem to have different concepts on dates/ facts. Maybe we should end this discussion. BTW: I was wrong about your narrator saying that Sterling got his plaque in 1960. He actually mistates 65. Ransom was also killed in 1918, not 17 as your film states. I can admit my errors. Bye!
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Yes, he was there when I interviewed him. How am I supposed to change film already in the can when the film is released? Once again, you just nibble at the edges but cannot dispute the facts that Mike Cox was the PR spokesman for the DPS when he made the statements in my film. Are you trying to say there were no "bad" Rangers ever? I'm not trashing the entire force, just the miscreants who wore the badge and brought dishonor to the star. You don't see that????
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 So I'm finally correct? Now, he wasn't with DPS in 2004? He left in 2000, so your film was in the can 4 years? Hard to believe. All you had to do to be accurate was state that he was the former media director or heck simply identify him as a well-known ranger author.
How many times do I have to say it? There were numerous BAD rangers, but your film clearly depicts them all (especially w/ those MX Revolution photos) as MONSTERS. Few rangers had badges in 1915 for your information.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Hard to believe the interview was in the can for four years? Not if you are self funding your film. Obviously you've never produced one nor raised money for one. You shoot what you can afford, raise more money, then do what you can. Camera crews and editors don't work for free, unless you work for the government. Can't you tell that interview was shot in Mike's office at DPS headquarters? Or maybe you've never been there. I DO NOT depict all as monsters. Re-read my opening statement.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Why is it so hard to admit that Rangers of that era were corrupt, or that the Adjutant General (Sterling) was corrupt, too?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Why does when I shot that interview have any bearing on what he said? We shot it when he was head of PR for DPS, in his office in Austin. Call him up if you don't believe me.
But the fact remains, we have him on camera saying what he says. Relying on Ranger reports of the era are not good history, nor documentation because they left things (like killing someone.) Again, you don't refute his statement.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
So that means he wasn't shot and killed by an unknown person as the autopsy states?
Fine, I can change the date, no problem. It still doesn't alter the facts of his demise.
Again, you just nibble at the edges without disproving anything. We'll be showing the film in Mission, TX on Feb. 25, where it all happened. Come see me sometime.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Ugh! Two wounded cattlemen were actually arrested according to newspaper accounts. Good luck in Mission. I'm done.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
So, to sum it up, you've pointed out some typos on some dates. (They were off by one digit, because they were mis-typed into the script.) That's an easy fix. But how does a typo on a date disprove the points of my film? Does a mistaken 7 for an 8 on the death of Ransom mean that the Rangers didn't kill Bazan and Longoria? Again, you have offered no direct refutation of an eyewitness account, so you have nothing. See you in Mission, Feb. 25.
Pecos45 4 weeks ago
@Pecos45 You can't let it go, can you? You've made audio/ book/ docudrama. What's next a big film w/ Brad Pitt? I know, I know as a Texan and ranger buff, I can't possibly know as much about South TX/ rangers as you. Being part Indian/ Jewish and a vet, I can't be as sympathetic to the oppressed either. None of the doc's misinformation matters and all of the pics of piled-up MX Rev. KIAs were really murdered by evil 1915 genocidal rangers. I'm a moron and havn't refuted you, so let it lay. Bye.
PanVet100 2 weeks ago
@PanVet100
And you still cannot provide anything to refute this film, except to point out that I was one digit off on a date...a typo. It has nothing to do with who you are, but your lack of direct refutation of an eyewitness, at the scene in 1915, whose story is recorded and transcribed at the oldest university in Texas. If you need me to get more photos of bodies piled up, that's easy. There are hundreds more photos in the Museum of South Texas and Texas A&M Kingsville. I stand by my story!
Pecos45 1 week ago
@PanVet100
The problem is that my film is too politically incorrect for all the Ranger fans. Most of them cannot take history that is unpleasant, and my film is.
The truth hurts.
Pecos45 6 days ago
@PanVet100 So let's be clear. You are saying that these killings never happened and that a typo on a date proves they never happened? No Rangers in 1915 ever killed innocent American citizens in the Rio Grande Valley and there was not a mass transfer of land from Hispanic to Anglo?
Pecos45 6 days ago
Ransom and Sterling ARE placed at the scene in the film, book and Sterling's bio.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Hello. Again and again, where does Roland "specifically" make these accusations against civilian Sterling, rangers Ransom and West in your film and book? Also where does Sterling admit to being present for these murders in his biography? A time frame in the film and page numbers for the books will be appreciated. When can you post Roland's recordings here to back up his statements about naming names?
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100 Sterling says in his book on page 39 that he drove Captain Ransom and his Rangers to the McAllen Ranch. Of course he omits the killings of Bazan and Longoria as does Ransom from his Ranger report. There is no record of their murders, not ever a death certificate, even thought they were US. citziens. Roland Warnock names Ransom and Sterling in his oral history and the transcripts. I will gladly mail the transcripts to you if you will send an address.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Wow! 10 responses in 18 hrs. My contemporary evidence, etc must've hit a nerve. I apologize for that. Im just responding to your questions/ statements in a disagreement that you reignited after a flameless year. Sterling places himself at McAllen's on the 24th, but says he then drove James B to Brownsville. He says NOTHING about chasing bandits or visiting Lane. There might be records, but so far as death certs. weren't they spotty w/ Anglos before 1920 too? Again, post the recordings!
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Not hitting a nerve. I believe that your flimsy attempts at refuting my film need to be met with emphatically. You still have nothing concrete to refute the contentions in BORDER BANDITS, Ranger reports of that era are suspect and Bill Sterling omits his part in the murder of an Anglo, even though there are court records that he did it, so therefore how can you go by his word?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Your deluge Monday and tone say otherwise, but I understand as I know writers/ directors sometimes get a bit heated when others opine on their work even when it's requested. Yes, my contemporary, primary and secondary data is not concrete, flimsy and suspect, but isn't it ironic that Roland's WORDS that the murders occurred the day after the McAllen raid led me to the 25th killings at the Lane Ranch. I don't beileve everything Stirling or anyone says, but when there's backup, I think.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Your "opines" deserve a deluge because I refuse to let flimsy evidence stand. Once again, I have primary evidence (an eyewitness). Where there is documentation (the Sterling-Warnock killing) it bears out my eyewitness. The lack of death certificates for Bazan and Longoria (American citizens) speaks volumes, as does the omission of their deaths from Ranger reports and Sterling's bio. A flimsy attack or a half truth must be met with vociferously. You still have nothing substantial.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Flimsy, half truths or unsubstantial, Roland is still my best witness with his Sept. 25th date, which lines up with Baker's presence at the Lane Ranch and two Mexican deaths on that day.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
You are welcome to produce your own documentary at your expense. I have put my money where my mouth is and self-funded my film.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Your "sources" are all suspect, due to Mike Cox's on camera interview, plus the fact that almost all of those Rangers from 1915 were appointed by a corrupt Democratic governor. Even Walter Prescott Webb says most were "unfit for service." But again, you produce nothing to directly refute eyewitness testimony. Plus there was a huge land transfer taking place in the Valley then and Rangers then were in on it. I don't see anything you've posted having value and where's the documents?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I know they're suspect because they disagree with your theories. I'm also a terrible researcher and I don't know anything about the rangers. I agree, there were MANY bad ones, especially in 1915. I think the main problem the museums, rangers, history buffs and others have with the film is that you don't have ONE GOOD WORD to say about the rangers. Your film ONLY depicts them as Hollywood stereotypes, mass murders, back shooters, sinners, etc. and you compare them to the KKK and Nazis.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Roland specifically named Sterling in his oral histories. We did not use them in the finished film because they did not lend themselves to a linear narrative, but I have the recordings and the transcripts as does Baylor University. Sterling admits to being at the McAllen Ranch in his biography but omits the killings. How do you respond to Sterling leaving out the killing of Frank Warnock from his biography? It happened, but he insists he never killed anyone. What does that say?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Well, most folks haven't HEARD his oral statements on their presence. They're also linearally edited from the book and borderbanditscom piece, Trouble on the Border. I don't see where the accusations are made anywhere, but here. Stirlings' bio is clearly directed to rangers, family and friends, not old enemies. Half is only about his favorite rangers, outlaws, etc. Frank W. probably wasn't deemed LINEAR either. Did Frank ever admit to, write about or receive punishment for his murders?
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
So what do you say about Sterling writing in his book that he never killed a man? Yet there is documented proof he did? What does that say about his veracity? Unlike Bazan and Longoria, there is a detailed paper trail the Sterling DID shoot an unarmed man in the back. It's not a sore spot, it is the documented proof to cement everything Roland Warnock said about that killing. Because the other victims were Mexican Americans, there is no paper trail there. What do you say to that?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Man, you must hate biographies/ history. I've read many books that were full of lies. Ranger bios are often the worst and Stirling comes nowhere near the biggest liar among rangers. As an old soldier, I've heard men brag about war/ conflict/ death, while others are utterly silent. Some say it shows the 2 sides of post-traumatic stress. I've seen men, women and children die in the most horrible ways and I've tried to forget their names. Where does Roland say L & B were shot in the back?
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100 On the contrary, I using Sterling's bio to discredit your contention. He states plainly he never killed a man, while court records and arrest warrants show otherwise. Sterling shot Frank Warnock in the back. Frank was married and a father of three, hardly a desperado. He got angry when someone cut off his water and had a gun in his hand. He did wrong, but he wasn't an outlaw. You provide suspect reports, a person with problems with the truth as a source, and no eyewitnesses.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 And I'm simply contending that Frank W. also killed people, didn't admit it in print like Stirling and got away with it until his threats went wrong. I didn't say he was a desperado/ outlaw, but he did have a reputation going back to Guadalupe Co. and Houston. Did the victims of his anger have wives and children? It seems real hypocritical to put him on a pedestal above his killer. Even Ranson said Frank W. was a bad man, which at least implies that he was no angel. it was a tough era.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Bill Sterling said in print that he "never killed a man" which is different than not admitting it. (Lie?) Frank was no saint, but he was not the "bad man" portrayed by some. He got angry and had a gun in his hand. A bad combination. I don't defend him, but he was awaiting trial when he was shot in the back while unarmed. The difference between killing an Anglo or a Mexican back then was that at least they had a sham trial when they killed an Anglo (IMHO).
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Sterling was old, a ranger and veteran, who are prone to brag, lie and omit details in BIOs, I get it !! What's your excuse for errors in the film? I really didn't want to get into your family's 100 yr old Sterling grudge as it has little to do with the L & B deaths. You sure know how to sugar-coat Frank W's murders, while adding salt to others. Roland makes Lamb's murder while driving a wagon sound more like a premeditated ambush, but I'm no lawyer. Yes, There were racial differences.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100 Continuing: You have provided no conclusive evidence, just opinion and conjecture. You have no defense for Sterling who is caught dead to right in a lie ("I never killed a man") and no other defense except to attack me personally. Worse, you are some anonymous poster on a YouTube site while I put my name, my money and my evidence out there. You may believe what you wish but so far I have primary evidence and the court papers to prove it.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100 And for the record, I like biographies, I just don't care for fantasy.
(BTW, I hold a degree in history from the oldest university in Texas and have the papers to prove it.) So I love history. I just don't care for mythology which is seeing ourselves the way we wish we were. History is how we really are.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Well, I sit corrected. I love history and fantasy, but well-defined. I recall your schooling from the oldest one as you've related it before. I've politely given you my detailed opinions/ evidence, but I dont think I've attacked you personally. You've chosen to be offended because it's easier than proving me wrong. Yes, I'm anonymous here, but so are you Pecos. My name is out there too as an actual ranger researcher and you mailed me a free DVD because you stated you wanted my opinion.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Frank was awaiting trial for his killing, but died before it could happen. But back to Sterling's bio. Why does he write that he never killed a man when we know he did? Lying? Cowardice? Lack of character? That makes all of his other statements suspect.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Boy, you're all questions and no answers. Nice diversion, but I said murderS, which is plural. I also asked if he ever WROTE about them. So what if Stirling was a lying coward w/ no character. It's not like he's among the great rangers or a Hall of Famer. There are no statues, books (other than his own) or films on him. Oh, wait there's yours. I rarely heard about Stirling or Ransom until your film. Pat Goodrich was even inspired to write an awful lauditory bio about that thug, Ransom.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
On the contrary, there is a shrine to Bill Sterling in the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame in Waco and a historical marker to his name in Corpus Christi. (And it's spelled "Sterling" with an "e"
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Big deal. He has a window/ grave plaque. They weren't given for killing Mexicans and Frank W before he became a ranger. How many people have Hamer and others killed before/ after they were rangers? So you caught me misspelling Stirlings' name. Bravo! If only you had displayed that attention to detail in your film. BTW: Stirling was given that plaque in '69 and not '60 as the narrator states. Ransom was also killed accidentally in the hotel hall and not assasinated in bed. Two of many!
PanVet100 1 month ago
Send me your mailing address. I'll mail you the transcripts and that should nail it.
When you have primary evidence, it trumps your secondary evidence.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Transcripts of Roland's voice recordings would only be secondary evidence and no more valuable than his statements in your Texas Cowboy book, which I bought many years ago. If you really want to put Roland's primary evidence out there, then place his recordings on You Tube as a companion to the Border Bandits documentary. Primary evidence only trumps contemporary and secondary proof when it is accurate.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
You've only provided anecdotal evidence, ,telling me you're "talked to people" or "read some reports."
As to Santos Tijerina, a DNA test could settle this argument conclusively.
I don't find anything you've mentioned (and I've yet to see any copies of anything you say you've seen) to refute our general contention, which is that Bazan and Longoria were killed by Rangers after an attempted revenge killing on James B McAllen went bad.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I've given more than anecdotal proof. I can't help it if you ignore it while others embrace it. Sometimes the Jefferson DNA card is just a last resort when one can't prove a theory with documents. Would it even prove paternity w/o a sample from James B.? Santos should have gotten a birth cert. after Willie's birth. She also should have put James B's middle initial and correct birth year. They were probably shot at by rangers, but not the ones you want. It was a failed stock/ ammo raid.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Sorry, but my grandfather was very specific that the McAllen ranch raid was over a girl. He told me he was the last man left alive that knew this, and that he didn't want it revealed until after his death. I know you want to believe that it's not so, but you are incorrect.
Do you have a problem admitting there were "bad" Rangers back then?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 No problem, but many historians/ history buffs have heard the last man standing defence before. It's not evidence and doesn't strengthen your
film's case. Roland's story isn't even controversial enough to hide for years. A Mexican girl lived in a wealthy Hispanic rancher's house and some innocent Mexicans were killed by Texas law officers. No shock! This would barely make the papers back in the early 19th Century. As I've said MANY TIMES before, there were GOOD, BAD and UGLY rangers.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Then where is your primary evidence to refute this? You provide only Ranger reports (which we know are suspect) and what some of your contacts believe. So who are you saying killed Bazan and Longoria? Do you have someone else at the scene who committed these killings???
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Of course we've gone over this before in PM, but you may have deleted them because they're suspect. As I stated last year, your so-called hitmen were tracked from the Palpa, Monte Cristo, McAllen, Longoria and Guadalupe (Lane) ranches by cavalrymen, sheriffs and rangers 23-27, while they robbed these places for cattle, horses, arms and ammo, but didn't catch them. Sheriff AY Baker's posse (2 deputies,3 rangers) arrived at Lane's on the 25th & spent the night, which fits Roland's story.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Except that Roland Warnock names Ransom and Sterling as being present at the killings of Bazan and Longoria because he was an eyewitness. Again, eyewitness testimony is what I have. Perhaps you can produce your own documentary if you feel this needs addressing. I have put my evidence out there and so far you have Ranger reports that are suspect, plus they wrote their own 'alibis.' Nice.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Actually, Roland states that some non-descript Ransom rangers (and prob. Baker & 2 deputies) came to the Lane Ranch the NIGHT (24th) of the McAllen raid when the moon was FULL and went to sleep, hoping to catch the bandits at nearby ranches. He says that Bazan and Longoria were killed the day AFTER the McAllen attack, then buried a couple days later. Longoria's marker states he died on the 24th and Bazan's 29th death is certainly a typo. Yes, I know ALL alibis and reports are suspect!!
PanVet100 1 month ago
So, because some dates "don't match" then Bazan and Longoria weren't killed?
Again, I have primary evidence, a witness at the scene who names names; Sterling and Ransom. What do you have????
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 You're putting words in my mouth which is a sign of despiration to prove I'm wrong. I never said these men weren't killed and repeatedly stated they were murdered. You have a 60 year old tale, but it's not the best evidence. I have contemporary, primary, secondary evidence and a consistent chronology that leads me to a different conclusion on the event. Roland was wrong about the age of the unamed girl/ relationship and the film was wrong about the age/ relationship of Santos Tijerena.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
So being wrong about the age of a girl means this didn't happen?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Actually Roland doesn't say how old she was. He also doesn't name her, state she had an affair w/ McAllen or say that the GIRL was present in the fight. I think he meant to say that the WOMAN (cook), not the girl, helped McAllen. This falls in line with the primary and secondary statements of Stirling, McAllen and contemporary papers that name AGRAS (the cook) as the heroine. Tijerena's parents were also long-time neighbors at the Santa Anita Ranch, not murder bosses living in Mexico.
PanVet100 1 month ago
I'll make copies of the transcript and mail them to you if you wish.
Pecos45 1 month ago
the statement about Sterling being there and being one of the trigger men is in my grandfather's oral history, on tape, and the transcripts. So, I have an eyewitness, at the scene.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Since you refuse to answer my questions on the placement of Stirling and Ransom at the murder scene in the film, book and the Stirling bio, can I assume that this info was strangely omitted from these things? Primary testimony is great data to have a day/ week/ year/ decade after an event, but memories fade. Roland's weren't recorded until 60 years after the event and he wasn't always accurate. They aren't any better than the "contemporary", primary and secondary statements of others.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Both Ransom and Sterling place themselves at the murder scene through their "reports" and Sterling's book, but they leave out the actual killings. My late grandfather was an eyewitness to these killings and names names. He first told me this story when I was a 5-year-old boy, so he wasn't yet 60, and quite frankly I don't see how that matters.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I thought 1915 reports were suspect. If you had shown a wider view of Ransom and Edds reports in the film, they would reveal to the audience that they actually give themselves alibis for your date of the murders. They left Edinberg on the 28th scouting west, visiting Monte Cristo, La Gloria, Jarachinas, Pinto ranches, then down to Los Ebanos, which is corraborated by Ransom rangers Baker, Glick and Brunner. No mention is made of ranger advocate Sam Lane's ranch. Sorry decades matter.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Why does Bill Sterling say in his book that he "never wounded a man fatally" during his entire service on the border? My film shows his bail bond and trial transcripts for the killing of Frank Warnock. If he omits the killing of an unarmed Anglo, it would be nothing to omit his killing two unarmed Mexican Americans. How do you explain his omission of the Warnock killing? It has documentation to prove it happened. Does that speak to his character???
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
What does it say about Sterling that he would rise to the rank of Adjutant General, but hide the killing of Frank Warnock from his biography and even insist he never killed a man? You seem to want "history" to fit your preconceived notion of "good" and "bad." The Rangers ARE good, but they had some "bad" players in 1915, and they were very bad. Why is that so hard to accept? Do you find Sterling exemplary, or a coward?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Not a lot since Stirling didn't RISE to the rank of AG, which isn't a position in the rangers as you state in the film. He didn't rise from Pvt-Sgt-Lt-Capt, then the highest rank of Sr Capt as you imply. He was politically made Capt and AG. He didn't need to HIDE killing Frank W. to cronies as he was judged innocent and it was public record. F. Hamer was one of the toughest/ deadliest, but is one of the most famous. Stirling was no worse a killer than Frank W. and WASN'T a 1915 ranger.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
So Sterling was a political appointee (I already knew that). What does that say about his character? He doesn't HIDE any killing, but says "I never killed a man." That's not HIDING that's something else. F. Hamer never said, "I never killed a man." Big difference. Sterling's truthfulness is questionable, as is his record. Most reputable historians don't think much of him.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 So, why imply that he rose in the ranks with hero or merit promotions as others did? It obviously says Stirling was politically savy unlike most rangers and in the wrong jobs. I agree, Hamer and Stirling were two different men w/ different life experiences and reactions. I also think Stirling may have "LIED" or "FORGOT" that he didn't drive Ransom to McAllen's on the 24th. Ransom apparently visited sick ranger Reneau at Kingsville on the 23d, then went to his Harlingen HQ on the 24th.
PanVet100 1 month ago
I understand that it is hard to learn that your 'heroes' have feet of clay, but it is what it is.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I don't think you understand. I never said that I was a fan of Sterling, Ransom or any of the rangers of 1915, but I'm a fanatic for truth. I agree these men and many rangers had clay feet, but that doesn't mean that mud should be slung at them as murderers, when the evidence doesn't exactly stick to them. I've actually met many of my heroes in Collin Powell, Medal of Honor winner Roy Benavidez, TX Ranger Ray Martinez, Elmer Kelton, actor Robert Duvall, etc. but know we all have flaws.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Did Colin Powell, Roy Benavidez, Ray Martinez shoot an unarmed 67-year-old man in the back? NO! They are of entirely different character than Ransom, Sterling, or A. Y. Baker (one of the most corrupt men in the Valley.)
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I completely agree. Powell, Benavidez and Martinez are polar opposites from those killers, but I don't get why you're comparing them. Ray and those great soldiers don't even belong in the same paragraph.
Thank you. I appreciate your support for a counter documentary. I've assisted on a few ranger books, articles, documentaries, etc. Presently, I'm helping a director w/ a film on a real bad ass ranger, who killed dozens of people and makes Stirling and Ransom look like choir boys.
PanVet100 1 month ago
I have the transcripts from the oral history tapes where Roland Warnock names Sterling. He names Ransom in the film and the book. Sterling says in his book that he drove Ransom and other Rangers to the McAllen Ranch, but he omits the killings of Bazan and Longoria.
So, I have an eyewitness, who has a recorded and transcribed testimony that places Sterling and Ransom at the scene as the killers.
What do you have?
(PS If you want me to mail you copies of the transcripts I will do so.)
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 What part of the film you sent me, my copies of your book and Stirling's bio contains the statements (pg #s) that they were present for the murders of these poor men? I think I've asked a few times now. How can one admit to a crime if they weren't there and the date of the crime isn't exact. I showed this case to a DPS detective last year and he said you could never get a conviction on such flimsy evidence today, especially when there's so many discrepancies on when the crime occurred.
PanVet100 1 month ago
Is this available on Netflix or anything? My Grandfather was Willie McAllen, whose mother was Santos Tijerina, whose family lived at the Santa Anita Ranch for many years. Please get back to me when you get a chance, thanks!
ssgtolivarez 1 year ago
@ssgtolivarez
It is not on Netflix. you will have to order from our Web site. Do a search for Border Bandits on Google and we will come up first.
Thanks,
Pecos45 1 year ago
@ssgtolivarez Do a google search for border bandits movie and we will come up first. We have a PayPal order form on the site. Just scroll down. I can't post a hyperlink on YouTube. They won't allow it.
Pecos45 3 months ago
The director informed me recently that he is once again screening his 2004 documentary Border Bandits. It will be showing TOMORROW, Jan. 7th at the TEXAS THEATER in DALLAS and he encourages all doubters to attend, where he will supposedly answer all questions on his evidence. I think I've posted a few good ones below, but please give this old soldier some credit. Adios.
PanVet100 1 year ago
Roland Warnock never personally says in the book or film that rangers Ransom, West or civilian W. Sterling were present for the murders on the 27th. There's contemporary evidence from the reports of Brunner and Glick that they scouted with Ransom between Duval Co. and Los Ebanos from the 26-30th, which gives Ransom an alibi for the 27th. The reports of Ransom rangers Baker, Dubose, Anders and Bills actually place them at the death site with A.Y. Baker's posse on the 25th when the moon was full.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
You are INCORRECT. Roland Warnock names Sterling as being there for the murders and Sterling even says so in his book, but he omits the killings. Ranger reports from that era were notorious for leaving things out.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Well, I'm sometimes wrong about things, but rarely incorrect with my meticulous research. It's been a year since my last post on this topic and when you didn't respond I thought you wanted to let dead men rest. Where does Roland's voice make this specific claim in your film and on what page of your book? Where does Sterling admit witnessing this crime in his bio? Ranger reports are sometimes vague, but that doesn't change the other inconsistencies with this allegedly true tale, retold.
PanVet100 1 month ago
Another problem is time. The film implies Bazan and Longoria were killed by Capt. Ransom's rangers (w/Sterling) on Sept. 27,1915 near Lane's Ranch and was buried on the 29th. The date is contentious because Bazan's stone says he died on the 29th, while his family says he died on the 26th. Grave records for Longoria show he died on the 24th, while his family says he died on the 26th. Roland Warnock stated the moon was full before the murder, which places the date closer to the 25th time period.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
And this means that Sterling, Ransom et al didn't kill Bazan and Longoria?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100 And this means that Ransom, Sterling et al did not kill Bazan and Longoria?
Because there is a difference of 1-2 days on the date of the death, it didn't happen?
What's your point???
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 If it doesn't fit, you must acquit, but it's such an old story now. Either Roland was wrong about the date, the moon or the murderers, but you can't have him correct on everything. I showed my evidence to TX Rangers and the MX Revolution authors Harris & Sadler at a Hall of Fame event (saw your name on an unused nametag) last year and they thought my evidence was good. I just don't think the whole story has been told on this tragic event despite your valiant efforts to find the truth.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Let me meet with the folks at the Ranger Hall of Fame and lay out my evidence and I think they'll come to a different conclusion, although they don't want to admit it. They look at this as an attack on the entire Ranger force, and it is not. It is just a revelation about a group of Rangers in a certain time period who did some bad things. This doesn't attack the entire Ranger force and I say so plainly at the beginning.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Do so, but I doubt it would change their minds. How do you expect them to take it as anything, but an attack? Look how it's been printed up in the papers after your events. I met a guy at the Ranger Museum (not affiliated w/ Waco's) in S.A. and he had gone to a Central Texas showing. He told me that he hated the way it invoked the ranger history/ myth through Hollywood, then revoked it by repeatedly (10 or 12 times) denigrating the rangers as back-shooters of unarmed, innocent people.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
I am very specific that my documentary is not an attack on the entire Ranger force, particularly by our opening. How come folks admit that that there are "bad cops" but never "bad Rangers"??? Why hasn't there ever been a SERPICO produced on the Rangers?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Nobody remembers disclaimers unless it's catchy like Dragnet. They recall what they see/ hear in a film. Sometimes they never forget it. You're film isn't as biased as I was initially told with Draper, Cox and Graham, but it's certainly spun to Hispanic audiences. My S.A. friend, who is Hispanic, didn't like it, but he's fond of pointing out (which you do not) that there were many Mexican, Indian and a few black rangers. There's never been an accurate ranger film on a good one either.
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100 I understand (some) of their consternation. It's like learning that the Lone Ranger and Tonto were gay, but the truth is the truth. Not all history is neat and pretty like a John Wayne western.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@PanVet100
Also, why did James B McAllen pay Bill Sterling's bail after Sterling killed Frank Warnock? Tit for tat for rubbing out Bazan and Longoria? You don't find that interesting? Again, we have firm documentation on Sterling's murder of Frank Warnock, so there's no disputing it happened the way Roland describes it. The jury just pulled an O.J.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I really didn't want to get into the Warnock/ Sterling feud since it didn't involve rangers/ bandits and is a 100 year old sore spot with your family. I guess you really want to talk about it. I reckon McAllen paid his bail because they were friends and he was a good driver. Are you saying that McAllen hired him to kill his neighbors, Longoria/ Bazan? I've never disputed that the Stirlings killed F. Warnock, but how is this like OJ. Did Nicole kill one of OJ's workers and threaten him?
PanVet100 1 month ago
@PanVet100
McAllen didn't hire Sterling (obviously) but I find it interesting he paid Sterling's bail. The trial was like OJ because it was obvious Sterling killed an unarmed man but the jury let him off. But because there is a paper trail, it shows that Sterling was untruthful about his past, therefore untruthful about other things.
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Thank God, w/ your contract killers, ranger murder, Warnock trial conspiracies, I don't think I could take another one. Well, you obviously know it wasn't as simple as killing an unarmed man. Frank Warnock was a man with a reputation for violence. He had recently threatened his former employers, the Stirlings and 2 of their workers. He actually murdered 1 unarmed man. Old rangers (as others do) sometimes lie, forget and exaggerate in their biographies, but that's why we have historians
PanVet100 1 month ago
@Pecos45 I would give you one or two days, but the dates given from the 24th until 29th is actually almost a week. Obviously, my point is that we don't know exactly when these murders occurred, so one has to pick one of six dates that makes sense. Roland said the moon was full, so I lean toward the 25th.
PanVet100 1 month ago
Santos Tijerena is depicted in the film as James B. McAllen's 14 year old concubine, savior and mother of McAllen's alleged child Willie. An obscured birth certificate for Willie is displayed in the film with comments by Willie's daughter as proof of a secret affair. The trouble with this scenario is that the document shows that Tijerena was 29 in 1915, Willie was born legitimate in 1908 and the named James McAllen's middle initial is absent and his age is wrong for James B. McAllen's true age.
PanVet100 1 year ago
I had some nice private talks with the producer/ poster of this film. As I've said it's not as one-sided as I thought, but it has flaws. Almost all of the pics of dead bandits/ Tejanos shown in the film as RANGER ATROCITIES are not what they seem. The stacked dead by the cart and logs were taken by R. Runyon after a 1913 Matamoros battle in Mexico. Most of the remaining pics of bandit dead are from fights with U.S.Troops at Norias, Texas and Columbus, New Mexico and were not killed by RANGERS.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
If you listen closely to the interview with Dr. Richard Ribb of the University of Texas, he states that killings were also done by outraged posses and vigilantes.
Pecos45 1 month ago
Well, I received the docudrama and enjoyed it very much. The writing, history, photos, expert interviews, film/ book/ TV media, etc. were very interesting. The production quality of the DVD is better than expected and it translated well to my big flat screen. The docudrama is also not as lop-sided as I was led to believe with the addition of interviews by ranger authors Don Graham and Mike Cox. The overall story of the bloody war between Mexicans, Anglos and Tejanos on the border is well done.
PanVet100 1 year ago
Comment removed
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
There are other elements to this story that are in the full film, particularly the fact that Mr. McAllen was keeping a 14-year-old Hispanic girl in his home, which sparked the so-called "bandit" raid on his ranch. Again, this is a complex story that does not lend itself to a simple narrative.
Pecos45 1 year ago
Comment removed
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
It's on the way. All questions to be answered. I would ask that you send me a personal e-mail with your comments/questions so we can unclog the comments board.
BTW: My research shows that many of those ranchers kept "casa chicas," that were called "maids."
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
Okay, I 'll wait. I guess it's the Xmas mail. By "unclog" the comments do you mean delete? I've seen vids here that have 20 pages of meaningless, vicious or just plain silly posts, so your board doesn't seem very clogged.
As a soldier and refugee Maria de Agras doesn't appear to fit the mold of a concubine. The1915 news accounts and most witness testimony depict her as a brave woman loading the deadly weapons of a heroic McAllen. Also her husband seems to have been a ranch resident.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
We never said that Maria Agras was a concubine. Where did you get that?
Pecos45 1 month ago
@Pecos45 Well, I made that statement a year ago before I saw your complete documentary and after I thought you were implying that this brave Mexican lady (Maria de Agras) was a 14 year old casa chica of McAllen. It wasn't until, I saw your film that I relealized that the 14 year old girl you were referencing was really 30 year old ranch worker Santos Tijerena. I don't consider either lady a concubine or casa chica and was only responding to your statements on their supposed living arrangements.
PanVet100 1 month ago
One thing some people might not realize. The border was a war zone at this time as it is now with the drug cartels. Some bad events may have instigated Ransom's probable murders of Bazan/ Longoria. In preceding weeks bandits and insurrectionists wrecked trains, burned down schools/ bridges, killed rangers, Anglos, Hispanics and kids, etc. They also beheaded a soldier and gave his ears away as trophies. Afterward they displayed his head on a pole. The corrupt governor/ courts also played a role.
PanVet100 1 year ago 2
@PanVet100
We cover all of that in the full film. Mr. Bazan was a 67-year-old man, American citiizen, and long-time neighbor of the McAllens and Lanes. He was unarmed and shot in the back. I don't believe that "war zone" justifies killing old men who have done nothing, and are known to local law enforcement. Watch the entire film and then give me your commments.
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
I'm sure you do, but I thought I would give a perspective here of the brutality on both sides of the so-called Bandit War. I never meant to imply that the murder was justified because of the conflict, only that it may have "set" Ransom off on a rampage beyond his orders from Gov.Ferguson. War is hell and civilians are usually the biggest victims, but they seldom get any real justice. I've seen war and I've seen innocents killed, but I would go crazy if I were to dwell on it too long.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
There was much more than "some bad events" and not everyone the Rangers killed were "bandits." Hundreds were American citizens of Mexican descent who had lived here for 100 years. They were killed for their land and called "bandits." It is all documented in the film, and at the courthouse. It was not "collateral damage" but a perfect storm of corrupt Rangers, a land boom and a Revolution in Mexico. (How come folks accept "bad cops" but not "bad Rangers?")
View the WHOLE FILM, first
Pecos45 1 year ago
Sorry to be a stickler for contemporary facts, especially on here. I'm still kind of new to YT. I see some are less polite and intelligent than we are. Back to Sterling. He mentions bandits crossing the river at Los Ebanos after the Norias Raid, but I don't see where this town is mentioned elsewhere. Sterling states on p. 48 that he "only" accompanied Ransom on 2 scouts after bandits. It appears in his narrative that these trips were to the Santa Anita and McAllen ranches. Check your pm. Later.
PanVet100 1 year ago
Capt. Ransom was a racist and an bullying dog, but I don't think his company was the prolific death squad that's been portrayed. They seem to do a lot of patrolling, arresting a few Mexicans/ Anglos and apparently killing more off the record. His company consisted mostly of young rookies and old cronies from his days as the murderous police chief of Houston before he was given the boot. Ransom's 1915 unit was far from elite or adequate as most were fired within a month or two of joining him.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
Shoot me your address and i will send you the film, then get back to me.
I have all of my ducks in a row, and it can stand scrutiny.
The McAllens omit a lot from their history, my film will show why.
Pecos45 1 year ago
Omission doesn't equate to admission, but understand your passion for the film. Sterling says that he drove to San Juanito, then took McAllen southeast. McAllen's Sept 26 presence (Amberson, McAllen p 486) in Brownsville lends credence to Sterling's claim. Eight rangers also failed to name Sterling as a member of the Sept. 22-30 scout to NW Hidalgo, but name the notorious A.Y. Baker. So Sterling is included in the '73 recording, but not the book? Still skeptical, but I may take your free film.
PanVet100 1 year ago
Wow! Five responses to my post yesterday. Nothing is certain without 1915 first person accounts or primary documents, but they're not always available. Time blurs history, but I deal with contemporary sources in my research. It has served me well in getting to the truth of an event. I've never disputed that Sterling coldly killed Warnock and don't believe Sterling ever denied it. Many lawmen, frontiersman, soldiers and others omit killings from their bios, some add or leave out whole battles.
PanVet100 1 year ago
The witness is my late grandfather. He saw the killings, then buried the two men. He told his story to Baylor's oral history program in 1973 before his death. Ransom makes no mention of the killings in his Ranger report for that day. They are mentioned in a new history of the McAllen Ranch. The other point is that Sterling says in his book that "I never had to wound a man fatally," yet we have arrest warrants, trial transcripts and bail bond for his killing an Anglo in 1915.
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
So you're the director? I believe your book Texas Cowboy transcribed the 73 recordings. In this wonderful book Roland Warnock states that an unnamed captain (certainly Ransom) and rangers drove up to the Lane ranch in Model Ts and killed Bazan and Longoria. No mention is made of Sterling and his Dodge at the scene. Ransom was a hired killer that followed few laws and his reports are sparse. However, none of the other ranger's reports note army scout Sterling's assistance in September.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
My grandfather said that Sterling was in the car, and Sterling mentioned that he drove Ransom and the Rangers to the McAllen Ranch. He then drove them to Los Ebanos, and back to the Guadalupe Ranch where they slept on the porch until they shot Bazan and Longoria. Ransom's report tells where they went, but he doesn't say anything about killing Bazan and Longoria, but my grandfather saw it all, and it is on tape.
Pecos45 1 year ago
A nice one-sided account with some skewed facts. Bill Sterling wasn't a Texas ranger at the time of this unfortunate incident and there's no evidence that he was even present. It would have been helpful if the author had some contemporary documentation on this event instead of hearsay years after the fact. I guess it doesn't matter if one wants to trash the whole ranger service. Carry on Texas bashers.
PanVet100 1 year ago 24
@PanVet100
Unfortunately you are incorrect. Bill Sterling proudly claimed that he was the man driving the car when Bazan and Longoria were killed in his autobiography, Trails and Trials of a Texas Ranger. I have documentation and eyewitness testimony. Bill Sterling applied for a Special Ranger commission at the time and later became Adjutant General, after earning a Captain's rank when he contributed to Dan Moody's election campaign. All of this is documented in the full film, no hearsay.
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
Well, it sounds like creative film making, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, though the names A. Longoria and J. Bazan don't appear in the index of Sterling's tendentious bio. What page is it on? An application or recommendation doesn't actually make you a ranger or even a janitor. It's the actual employment or commission for a service. Sterling was apparently a U.S. army scout at this time and a wannabee ranger, but doesn't appear on ranger rolls. Where is this document?
PanVet100 1 year ago 2
@PanVet100
In the FULL FILM (not the trailer) we say that Sterling killed three people before he became a full Ranger (under Dan Moody). We have his application for a Special Ranger which we show in the film. In his book he doesn't mention the killing of Bazan and Longoria but says he drive the car carrying Henry Ransom to the McAllen Ranch. An eyewitness saw him and the other Rangers shoot and kill the two men. He leaves that part out of his book, but places himself at the scene.
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
I haven't seen the whole thing, but I have seen parts, the book and stories on the film. Yes, Sterling killed an unknown number of people in the years before he became a Texas ranger, but he wasn't convicted of murder and these unfortunate deaths don't mean that he killed Bazan and Longoria. Sterling said (pg 39-42) that he drove the rangers in his new Dodge to McAllen's ranch on the 24th, then took McAllen to Brownsville. He doesn't place himself at Lane's ranch. Who's the witness?
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
He also shot and killed an unarmed Franklin Warnock in the back on the streets of Mission. He leaves this out of his bio, too, but we have the arrest warrant, bail bond and trial transcripts in the film. None of this is in Sterling's book either.
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
Sterling definitely killed Warnock. I'm not saying it was justified, but wasn't this murder in retribution for Warnock killing an unarmed Sterling employee over water rights? I don't particularly like Sterling as he didn't do any hard ranger service and was something of a dandy. People always add/ omit vital information in their biographies to make themselves look good. Why would a Sterling be any different? He was no Jack Hays and was almost forgotten in the Texas ranger pantheon.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
PS We showed the film at the Bob Bullock Museum in Austin last May. Special guest was Tony Leal, Chief of the Texas Rangers. He took part in a panel discussion and had no issues with our facts. That's what I got, what do you have?
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
I love the Bullock Museum and I've visited many times, but I sadly missed this film event. Initially, I wasn't aware that you were affiliated with this documentary and really didn't mean to offend you with my earlier comments. I've met Senior Captain Leal and many others, but mostly retired rangers. They're great lawmen and investigators, however few are true historians. Still everyone has a right to their opinions on the storied Texas rangers and other subjects.
PanVet100 1 year ago 2
@PanVet100
OK, because Bill Sterling writes in his autobiography that he WAS present at the time of the killings of Bazan and Longoria, I have his own words placing him there. What do you have to refute this evidence?
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
I'm sorry, that just doesn't sound like the flamboyant Gen. Sterling I've read about. Admitting to participating in the terrible murders of two Mexican civilians in a biography that was meant to portray himself as a heroic fighter for justice even before he became a Texas ranger. Of course the governor's hired thug Henry Ransom would have been proud of killing these Tejano men. I guess I mostly have a lack of evidence that Sterling was present without some contemporary proof. Later.
PanVet100 1 year ago 10
@PanVet100
He took great pains in his book and his legacy to insist he "never killed a man."
It's in his book, and was repeated at the service where they placed a marker on his grave in Corpus.
It's just not true.
We're just telling another side of the story that's never been told. People can believe what they want.
Pecos45 1 year ago
@Pecos45
He was an old man on the precipice of death and passed away a few months after publication. He wasn't the first author, Texan or ranger to stretch the truth or conveniently omit information. Texas was a vast and unforgiving frontier unlike no other. Horrific events occurred during the MX Revolution and the spillover war on the US border that are sometimes forgotten. Sterling may have been a liar and border hothead, but that doesn't make him one of the killers of Bazan and Longoria.
PanVet100 1 year ago
@PanVet100
No can say with certainty who pulled the trigger and ended their lives, but he was in the car that drove by and shot them in the back. They were unarmed and Bazan was a 67-year old man. But it is a proven fact that he shot an unarmed Frank Warnock in the back on the streets of Mission, was arrested and underwent a murder trial. Now how he conveniently forgot that fact and wrote that he never killed a man is a bit puzzling, don't you think? Shooting an unarmed man in the back???
Pecos45 1 year ago
@PanVet100
Again, you are attempting to get me to describe a one-hour film in a comments section on a Web site. I will send you a copy of the film at no charge and you can see exactly what we put out there. I stand by everything in it, as it is all vetted by eyewitness testimony or documentation. Shooting an unarmed man in the back and claiming you never killed anyone isn't "stretching the truth or conveniently omitting information." What would you call it?
Pecos45 1 year ago
@PanVet100
It is very important for me to point out that in the FULL FILM we state plainly that "no one can say with certainty who pulled the trigger and ended the lives of Bazan and Longoria," but according to eyewitness testimony (and Bill Sterling's book and Captain Ransom's report) the men in the car that day were Bill Sterling, Henry Ransom and Paul West. So what's incorrect about that?
Pecos45 1 year ago
whats the name of the of the song that plays at 1:40???
jis04 1 year ago
@jis04 .
It is a Spanish-language version of the Eagles' song, "Desperado." I got permission from Don Henley to use it.
Pecos45 1 year ago
Of course we NEVER learn about these things in school but we learn about how the Blacks were treated. We should demand that our sad history should be shown in today's history books so people can know how our ancestors were treated. We want the truth!
michael85225 1 year ago
@michael85225 As someone told me, you start talking to a black person and in 10 minutes they will tell you about slavery. You start talking to a Jewish person and in 10 minutes they will tell you about the Holocaust. But if you talk to a Hispanic, what's their story????
Pecos45 1 year ago
Not the Hispanics, the Mexican-Americans (Chicanos) stories. Let's see in the 1960s we were treated as second class citizens in our schools which led to the Chicano walkouts, but of course they won't tell you about that in school. Or how about how thousands of our people were wrongfully deported during Operation Wetback and other immigration sweeps just because they were of Mexican descent.
michael85225 1 year ago
....Or what about the Zoot Suit riots, in which many Chicanos were beaten and raped. These are just some of the stories that people refuse to believe. Do you honestly think that Black people were the only people treated unfairly in the USA?
michael85225 1 year ago
There are hundreths of stories like these in south texas... even in wikipedia you can find a few of the more recorded ones in texas history... some where dozens of mexicans where killed by so called Texas Rangers who half the time weren't even from Texas...
3rdcoasthorn 3 years ago
Texans have always been cowardly thugs -just look at Dubya.
Jelperman 3 years ago
there should be justice for these innocent 2 men that were shot the most horrific cowardly way by Texas Rangers. who supposedly are there to protect and abide by the law.. where is the justice...
MARTIVIRA 3 years ago
Thank you for telling the truth. Very interesting and sad.
grocks45 4 years ago
I am a MEXICAN BANDIDO!
bandidomexican 5 years ago
Hmmm good to know the truth!
bandidomexican 5 years ago
Real good video
bandidomexican 5 years ago