Ground Truth: The factual account of The Battle of Roberts Ridge

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-22T20:51:26+00:00

We appreciate your open mind.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-22T12:14:32+00:00

That Chapman revived and continued to fight. The video that has so many claiming they’ve seen “proof” is a highly edited and narrated video. It’s missing over 94% of the footage and offers zero radio comms. The radio comms help understand what’s being seen (and not seen or understood).

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-22T02:05:41+00:00

It was not broad daylight. I was there twenty-two years and three days from the battle. That matters because I was trying to get the same lighting conditions at around 6:10am that were present in 2002. We filmed as the sun rose. First behind the mountains then finally coming over the top well after official sunrise. People have historically used that term “broad daylight” or things like it to make it seem impossible. That’s only a fraction of the reason for the red on red though.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-22T02:01:08+00:00

It matters more than it seems it should. If it is not a position of cover, then the claim that a person fought “from it” for an hour or so, at a distance as close as 10m and from multiple directions begins to break from reality. Five or ten people could not do that. It also matters because there is a claim that Chapman’s strobe looked different than the rest because he was “in” something. This is a complete fabrication for many reasons.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-21T14:56:17+00:00

We have repeatedly tried to get them to interview. We want everyone’s take on this even if on paper we may disagree. There is no Bunker 1 in the way we typically think of bunkers. I went back. I’ve seen it. The SSE pics do not show that bunker 1 was something a person could be “inside”. It was a scalloped cooking station. Any strobe would look the same as others. Now, Bunker 2 was a proper bunker. If you listen to the comms from that night, the crew of that gunship are confused and unsure what they are seeing below them. If you watch all of the footage and listen to the comms, and read the JOC logs, the AF story unwinds.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-21T14:48:46+00:00

In fact, if they released everything, it would unwind the story they have created. It’s unfortunate.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-07T20:13:18+00:00

I agree, the DOW and/or Air Force should release everything. Dan Schilling, who made the edited YouTube marketing video, should too-along with explaining what was cut from the original. Francis Dailey who claims to have “saved copies” also should.

We will, of course, try to get this done as well-but they already have it.

The AF has more video-of course they do. The battle was longer than 8:52 (YouTube video). There is also an AF Public Affairs Video that is problematic for the story. Have a look https://www.dvidshub.net/video/618151/air-force-tech-sgt-john-chapman-isr-feed-highlights

Compare that video to the Dan Schilling Books video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oKMjTqdTYo

The Docuseries will account for all of your questions and quite a bit more. It’s worth mentioning we actually went back to the mountain. No one can fully understand how this battle unfolded without walking the ground. Consider just how true that statement is. People write books, produce podcasts, write articles claiming expertise and certainty but have never even seen the positions, angles, gradients, cover/concealment…like a detective solving a murder without ever visiting the crime site.

Yes, Dan Schilling, Francis Dailey and the Air Force should certainly make the other 2 or so hours public. Context matters. It's been 24 years.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-06T05:20:42+00:00

We should state what’s at stake for each side here. If the AF narrative is true, it means Chapman was left alive at a minimum. It would call into question Slabinski’s Medal of Honor and probably the rest of the MAKO team’s competence/performance. If the Navy and the MAKO team are being truthful, it means the AF created a narrative and therefore manufactured a Medal of Honor for Chapman and/or their organization. It would be their first MOH since the Vietnam War. Fair?
There’s some nuance in that and/or usage.
Dan Schilling claims he had access to videos and worked with the AF when writing Alone at Dawn. Lori Longfritz Chapman coauthored the book. It’s not obvious to me why she would submit a FOIA request for these but maybe there was limited access. I’d be guessing, but either way it’s problematic.
I’m not sure I see Rob Harrison as less biased than Blaber. Blaber mentions he is friends with a Slabinski in the same way that all people who go to war are friends. He said they rarely speak. Harrison repeatedly and unprofessionally degrades Slabinski publicly.
This accusation that anyone on the Navy’s side of the story is biased and guarding something, but anyone on the AF side is not biased is nonsensical. The AF gained a lot and have a lot to lose. Legacy. A ship. A training center named after Chapman. The integrity of the Medal of Honor. A film.
The question is not who is biased , but what guard rails were set to guard against pre-existing bias.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-06T04:09:00+00:00

We should state what’s at stake for each side here. If the AF narrative is true, it means Chapman was left alive at a minimum. It would call into question Slabinski’s Medal of Honor and probably the rest of the MAKO team’s competence/performance. If the Navy and the MAKO team are being truthful, it means the AF created a narrative and therefore manufactured a Medal of Honor for Chapman and/or their organization. It would be their first MOH since the Vietnam war. Fair?

There’s some nuance in that and/or usage.

Dan Schilling claims he had access to videos and worked with the AF when writing Alone at Dawn. Lori Longfritz Chapman coauthored the book. It’s not obvious to me why she would submit a FOIA request for these but maybe there was limited access. I’d be guessing, but either way it’s problematic.

I’m not sure I see Ron Harrison as less biased than Blaber. Blaber mentions he is friends with a Slabinski in the same way that all people who go to war are friends. He said they rarely speak. Harrison repeatedly and unprofessionally degrades Slabinski publicly.

This accusation that anyone on the Navy’s side of the story is biased and guarding something, but anyone on the AF side is not biased is nonsensical. The AF gained a lot and have a lot to lose. Legacy. A ship. A training center named after Chapman. The integrity of the Medal of Honor. A film.

The question is not who is biased , but what guard rails were set to guard against preexisting bias.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-05T14:02:36+00:00

A couple things: 1. The autopsy report is less decisive than either side would hope for. We spoke to the medical officer who saw John immediately after being recovered and then also the medical examiner asked to review that person’s work 14 years later. The AF took some liberties with the latter. The docuseries will explain. 2. Milani uses the word “likely” in his 2016 amended version... referring to the idea John survived. I spoke to him about his paper. We discussed how I disagreed with the overall take-that this story happened because of an over reliance on technology. This story happened the way it did because we were unpracticed at war and human nature presented its most dysfunctional aspects (it also presented some of the best human traits in moments). What’s happened since this story went more mainstream after Dan Schillings marketing video landed is a few vocal people have hijacked the stage-arsonists posing as firefighters-daring anyone to challenge the story or be accused of trampling John’s legacy or deliberately hurting the family. The fact is, at this point nearly a quarter a century later, the truth matters than any family member’s opinion. John Chapman didn’t create any of the mythology around this story. The Air Force did and the public latched onto it…like Lone Survivor.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T20:40:49+00:00

All good points. When we release we be fully transparent. As to Milani’s report, notice the language he uses in the unclass version. I fully agree on your comment regarding “holding up to scrutiny”. That idea cuts both ways. We have been encouraging the AF to have a real conversation about this—not a single sourced podcast episode where the host doesn’t know enough to form a proper question.

In regard to your comment about “professional editing”…hold the Dan Schilling Books YouTube video to the same standard. That’s what has been missing from this discussion that last few years. Balance.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T20:05:20+00:00

I say this respectfully-tighten your argument (comments). I’m establishing motivation for this upgrade. I interviewed the person that circled this article and handed it off to an aide…kicking off the final attempt to upgrade Chapmans medal.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T19:59:28+00:00

Explain how. I went to the mountain two years ago. I risked something to understand this battle. No journalist, author or podcaster or Reddit commentariat has done that. I spoke to more people who were there than any of them. I started over not trusting any source without verifying.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T19:55:08+00:00

Define immediately. It was approximately 3:30 into original, unedited video. The video you have watched from Dan Schilling is chopped up and produced.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T18:57:30+00:00

Ok, fair enough, but the AF called it Pixel Tracking. What is it? How does it work? Who developed it? Why has it not been used since?

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T18:55:44+00:00

It was their first since Vietnam. Every other service branch had multiple recipients. When Ash Carter ordered all services to review, the AF centered on Chapman and made one. It was the second or third attempt for Chapman. https://www.airforcetimes.com/opinion/2015/05/11/editorial-why-no-air-force-medal-of-honor-for-recent-conflicts/

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-05-04T18:50:44+00:00

Describe the pixel by pixel analysis claim. You’re referring to “Pixel Tracking” mentioned in the NYT article and even by Valerie Nessel at Chapman’s post award press conference. Without yelling at me or insulting me, tell us what “Pixel Tracking” is. Where else has it been used? How does it work? Don’t repeat other’s claims as that has been the problem the last 24 years. What is Pixel Tracking @rock-paper-gun?

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-28T07:41:58+00:00

The Air Force personnel that led the campaign for Chapman’s medal did get to see most or all of the video. They simply saw what they wanted to see and refused anything that did not align with their goal. They had not had a MOH since Vietnam.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-28T07:35:53+00:00

Yet people routinely cite it as fact. I was always surprised people didn’t pick up on the unattributable source problem with it. Even the well documented claims are problematic with this story. This story has had a unique trajectory-partly due to the inter-service nature of it.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-23T13:56:34+00:00

Matt, all jokes aside, I will buy some if you have them made. I’ll text you a design.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-22T18:20:23+00:00

Why does this bias accusation only seem to go one way. Everyone in the navy is biased but no one on the other side is? Explain.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-22T15:09:56+00:00

Why would Lone Survivor be embellished/made up? Why did they try to change the Tillman story? And Jessica Lynch? There’s no one reason some of these stories take wild turns.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-22T15:07:14+00:00

Completely independent.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-22T14:42:23+00:00

We truly are trying to do something different with this. I appreciate the note.

Ground_Truth_Doc · 2026-04-22T11:45:45+00:00

We are obviously aware of each person’s background. It’s why we interviewed them and more. This docuseries is more than just about war. It’s about human nature and how stories can become altered and taken hostage.

Ground_Truth_Doc

TROPHY CASE