1986: KGB kidnaps, castrates, and kills extremist's relative

A meme tht pops up from time to time is ‘Have you ever wondered why Muslim terrorists don’t kidnap Russians??’. This sounds like Right-wing propaganda, so I did a quick search and found
this page The url is upi dot com. I noticed a couple of things:
[ul][li]They spelled ‘Muslim’ as ‘Moslem’[/li][li]There are no names[/ul][/li]I wondered how the KGB knew who the terrorists were, and how they tracked down their families. Since the Jerusalem Post was cited, I added that to my search terms. Only two links were returned. The one from WikiVisually says:

The footnote links to the Los Angeles Times, which cites the Jerusalem Post.

It still doesn’t ‘smell’ right. Did this actually happen as described?

Major parts of my family have been involved in security and intelligence at various times; This is NOT actual confirmation, but the rumors passing 'round amongst the ‘sneaky pete’ crew that I know square substantially with this story.

Moslem is not a mis-spelling. I remember reading of a similar incident in some second-rate thriller. Geoffrey Archer’s Eagle Trap comes to mind, as does Tom Clancy.

Didn’t say it was. But it’s a different spelling from usual. Maybe not 30 years ago, but it sticks out now because every recent instance of that spelling that I’ve seen has been on signs carried by Tea Party types.

Interestingly, this is a twist on a story that I hear about why Israeli personnel are not targeted. No details, just that Mossad will go after the extended families. Off to check Snopes.

There’s nothing out there I can find to corroborate my variation. Just “sea stories” basically.

I don’t know about Archer but it was definitely in a Clancy book.

Really? It’s not uncommon in the UK, though out of fashion.

ETA A quick search shows I’ve used it myself on this messageboard…

Sadly, I wouldn’t put it past the KGB morally; however it just feels like propaganda — the same type of salacious horror as was used against the nazis, the Americans ( in places ), and marxist regimes and movements everywhere. And even against banditos.
Also, separately, if he was immediately killed, the castration wouldn’t matter to him afterwards; and indeed they could just as well simply kill him without grand guignol.
I can’t imagine ISIS with their own torturing practices would be that scared by this tactics by the Russians.

“Back in the day”, Moslem was the predominant spelling.

Time was, once upon a time, they were widely called Mohammedans – a term which Muslims themselves vehemently reject (and always have, AFAIK).

The rumors I heard from within the community (this is STILL not verification) indicated that the castration wasn’t aimed at the target, but rather at anyone else whom might feel emboldened.

Doesn’t make it so, but that was the thinking I heard.

I recall something similar being reported in the mainstream news back around the mid 1970s. This was during the heyday of so-called “Palestinian terrorists”, the Munich Olympics killings Munich massacre - Wikipedia, the desert mass hijacking Dawson's Field hijackings - Wikipedia, etc.

I have no cites.

I have no idea if the story is true, but apparently the Russians abandoned the tactic. Muslim terrorists, if we’re lumping them all together, still decided to take about 850 Russian hostages in a Moscow theater in 2002. So, even if the incident happened as described in 1986, it’s not accurate that it prevented future attacks.

ETA: Although I suppose you could draw a distinction between kidnapping and taking hostages in a public place and maybe make the meme technically true.

It didn’t stop the abduction and killing of four Russian diplomats in 2006.

That meme is pure right-wing propagandist bullshit.

As above, I remember reading the story in the mainstream press back when it is supposed to have happened. Of course it wasn’t a news story, rather an analysis piece, and it didn’t provide any sources. Whether it is true or not, it isn’t a recent invention, nor a US centric one.

It definitely happened. But possibly only because (as described in this book), unbeknownst to the kidnappers, the murdered diplomat was actually a popular KGB agent.

So actually the situation was comparable to the case of Enrique “Kiki” Camarena when the US demanded massive retribution for the murder of a DEA agent.

Also it is pretty messed up that right-wingers in the US should use this to support their case, as when all this was going on in Lebanon Reagan was getting US hostages released by sellingIran weapons.

Someone had to fund those poor oppressed Contras.

I have heard variations of the story with several different protagonists/antagonists. Typically the moral the storyteller wanted to give was “look xyz really knows how to deal with <enemy of the day>, unlike us, who are too soft for our own good”.

I don’t doubt that intelligence services world over have at times done some pretty brutal things to an individual, in retaliation for some perceived slight. I don’t think anyone truly believes that a policy of brutality is anything but extremely counterproductive.

Sadly, I think lots of people truly believe that a policy of brutality is perfectly valid, effective, and justifiable. Even worse, many of them are in positions of government right now.

My network won’t me access that site for security reasons-What is the title, and who is the author?