August 15, 2022, 12:32:26 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Army Tactician - Definitely Ambush, potential events  (Read 5863 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

January 21, 2022, 06:05:56 AM
Reply #30
Offline

EBE


I didn't know there were items found at the scene that didn't belong to the hikers. What were those?

Soldier's puttees, one found near the cedar and one in the tent. Yuri Yudin said that those did not belong to the Dyatlov group.

Except of that, according to Maslennikov's notebook (scan 47), they found a piece of broken ski 20m from the tent.
 

January 21, 2022, 02:06:02 PM
Reply #31
Offline

Jean Daniel Reuss



 
              Reply #27
Hold on.  Weren't the tent and the fire on opposite sides of the cedar tree, meaning that the fire wouldn't be visible from the tent?

              Reply #28
..........................
I think that it is possible that the fire was visible from the tent location.
.........................
I doubt that it was lit for the purpose of attracting the Dyatlov group.
.......................
My personal opinion is that it was lit by the attackers
.......................

EBE : I keep your invaluable idea    : " The fire was lit by the attackers "

That is why I now consider myself as the self-proclaimed spokesman for the theory I now call :
 
The     TOKEB theory     (Tumanov - Oestmoen - Kandr - EBE - BottledBrunette)   


°°°°°°°°°°

1)   RMK : Hold on.  Weren't the tent and the fire on opposite sides of the cedar tree, meaning that the fire wouldn't be visible from the tent?
 
2)   EBE : ...I doubt that it was lit for the purpose of attracting the Dyatlov group...

I will now answer these two objections.


°°°°°°°°°°

Explanations according to TOKEB - Short version

1) The exit from the tent without the axes and without the necessary equipment is produced by the sudden introduction of a suffocating gas inside the tent.
Thus there is no threat with a firearm

2) It is the attackers who first start a very small fire under the cedar.
   Initially this small fire behind the cedar is not visible by the hikers in the area or inside the tent.

3) As the hikers exit the tent, suffocating, the attackers make this small fire much bigger.
    Thus the hikers are then guided and drawn towards the cedar by a huge flame which becomes clearly visible from the area of my tent.

°°°°°°°°°°

Explanations according to TOKEB - Long version

For those readers who prefer detailed explanations, I have written a text with a lot of details to facilitate the reading.
But of course, one should not take into account the details introduced to lighten the style (for example the precise times) which are without importance.
Many variations are possible without changing the major guidelines of the TOKEB theory.

Reminder on the TOKEB theory (Tumanov - Oestmoen - Kandr - EBE - BottledBrunette)

We consider that there are :
a)  The client or sponsor who organised the operation to exterminate the 9 hikers.
   •      He is an NKVD officer with a certain (unknown) rank in the Gulag
   •      The client hires (pays) attackers-contract killers-mercenaries- enforcers, whom I simply call the attackers.
   •      The client doesn't go out on the field, he stays in heated buildings in the Ivdellag region.
   •      The client having mistreated and martyred the Zeks in his power for years became a psychopath, moreover with the blessing of Stalin who was himself a perverted psychopath (this last opinion is, I believe, disputed by many Russians today).
   •      The client did not tolerate the insolence and recriminations of the hikers and particularly of Dubinina
   •      With the Thaw and the secret report of the XX Congress on February 24, 1956, the sponsor was afraid of losing his own advantages and even his life, like Beria, Boris Rodos and many others stalinists. By having the 9 hikers exterminated, whom the client considers to be propagandists in charge of promoting the XXIst congress (because of the Voucher), he shows the Kremlin the fierce determination of the apparachiks of the Ivdellag to fight against de-Stalinisation by all means
   •      The client, who is an NKVD officer, is competent and clever in managing military, police and security operations.  It is he who gives the attackers his orders for elaborate tactics of brute force or cunning.

b)  The attackers are former guards of the Ivdellag who are specialised in pursuing and often exterminating escaped zeks.
    They are physically strong, hard-hitting brutes, trained to make long, all-weather runs in the Siberian regions with ease. The attackers are few in number, which explains the length of the hand-to-hand combat (« Altercation on the pass »). Perhaps only 3, because experienced mercenaries are scarce.


The attackers coming from North-2 arrive in sight of the tent without being seen by the hikers, on the afternoon of February 1 at about 4 pm.
Then they split into two groups: group A and group B.

When it is dark enough, group A approaches the tent following the trail left by the hikers.
Group B starts a small fire behind the cedar tree, the fire is small and weak enough so that it is not visible from the tent.
Next to the small fire Group B prepares a supply of wood.

When darkness is complete group A approaches the tent silently and unnoticed, which is possible because
   a) There is always some wind on these bare slopes. The tent moves in a way that is not perfectly silent. The hikers inside the tent cannot hear the cautious approach of strangers walking outside.
   b) On the contrary, since the hikers have no reason to speak in a low voice, a stranger outside placed close enough can hear the conversations coming from inside and act accordingly.


In accordance with the client's instructions, when all the unsuspecting hikers are inside the tent, group A starts the attack:

   a) Group A warns group B of the beginning of the attack, with a flash light signal (for instance).

   b) Group B (which is under the cedar) quickly makes a huge flame, so that the fire is now clearly visible from the tent. The rapid increase in visibility of the fire is achieved by immediately using the easily combustible supply of branches and bark, to which 1 litre of petrol is eventually added.

  c) Group A introduces "a kind of dope inside" (i.e. a tear gas grenade, canister) through the entrance curtain, which is not continuously closed.

  d) The hikers rush out of the tent suffocating, without the axes and without the necessary clothing.

  e) The attackers carry out the first part of the planned ruse (deception) by simply saying --->

Toxic gases are reaching the slope - no one can stay near the tent.
(Here a deceptive explanation of a missile accidentally going out of control and dropping hydrazine may be added).

 f) The attackers carry out the second part of the planned ruse (cunning, deception) by saying --->

let's all go down to our aid station. We will be safe. The place is out of reach of toxic gases and there is a fire to keep warm.

 g) The hikers do not realise that they have been fooled and they thank the attackers for their good advice and cooperation.
 
 h) The hikers calmly go down the slippery slope, heading towards the fire, " without excessive haste " so as not to risk falling.

     The rest of the massacre is much more banal (mundane) and will be described later according to the TOKEB theory.
Jean Daniel Reuss

Rational guidance =

• There is nothing supernatural and mysterious about the injuries suffered by the Dyatlov group. They are all consistent with an attack by a group of professional killers who wanted to take the lives of the nine  [Per Inge Oestmoen].

• Now let us search for answers to: WHO ? WHY ? HOW ?

• The scenario must be consistent with the historical, political and psychological  contexts.

• The solution takes in consideration all known findings.