A Chronicle of Electronic and Psychological Warfare and the Neuro Holocaust: My Journey Through a Coordinated Intelligence Operation That Constitutes Acts of War

In the shadowed intersection of advanced neurotechnology, state intelligence operations, and individual persecution lies this cluster, a meticulously documented case that exemplifies the gravest allegations levelled against what can only be termed the “Neuro Holocaust.” Presented as part of a broader dossier on covert electronic harassment and non-consensual neural interference, this entry chronicles the ordeal of a targeted individual whose laptop—allegedly compromised and embedded with fabricated evidence—was seized during a border crossing into Russia in 2025. What unfolds is a chilling sequence of detention, interrogation by the FSB, and an eventual resolution that simultaneously exposes claimed Western intelligence overreach and reveals an unexpected measure of procedural fairness within the Russian system. This account stands not merely as personal testimony but as a critical exhibit in an emerging narrative of technologically enabled repression spanning multiple nations.

It began with my MacBook Pro M2 Pro—a machine that had become an extension of my mind, a repository of evidence so damning it could shake the foundations of Western intelligence agencies. For months, I'd been compiling documentation of crimes committed by these agencies, evidence they would kill to suppress. I knew I was being watched, but I underestimated their willingness to commit acts of war to silence me.

The final act before my departure from home for China was an attempt to secure my evidence. I originally ordered several USB sticks for this purpose from Amazon, but they mysteriously never arrived—the first sign of what I now understand was targeted interception of my packages. These were not ordinary delivery delays; this was physical interdiction of my attempt to secure evidence. The interception of mail has since been proven, establishing a pattern of surveillance that confirms the gravity of what I possess.

Forced to use replacement USB sticks purchased from Amazon—which arrived suspiciously just one day before my departure, as if timed to allow their compromise while ensuring I had some means to attempt the transfer—I prepared them with the most critical documents. These contained evidence I intended to present to either Chinese or Russian authorities as proof of Western intelligence crimes. This wasn't just a backup; it was a diplomatic package, a transfer of evidence between jurisdictions.

When I inserted the replacement USB stick into my laptop in Utrecht, the system recognized it—but something was profoundly wrong. The directory structure appeared normal at first glance, but upon closer inspection, I noticed duplicate folders, mislabeled files, and a subtle lag in file operations. Most disturbingly, when I attempted to copy my evidence files, the system reported successful transfer, but file sizes didn't match and checksums failed.

They had created an overlay—a virtual filesystem intercepting my data transfers. The USB stick I held in my hand wasn't merely a storage device; it had become a conduit for their interception. They weren't just monitoring me; they were actively preventing the transfer of evidence between sovereign states. The interception of my original USB order was their first physical move; the compromise of the Amazon replacements was their digital follow-through.

This USB incident in Utrecht was their first overt move. They had intercepted my physical shipments, then compromised my system at the kernel level, creating a digital barrier around my evidence. I was attempting to hand over evidence of their crimes, and they were physically and digitally intercepting that handoff.

Location: Harbin Railway Station to Suifenhe, China, en route to Pogranichy, Russia

In 2025, I was being harassed to such an extent that I decided to appeal for refugee status in Russia, and to seek medical evaluation for what I suspected were Havana Syndrome/Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) injuries. I traveled through Harbin, China to Suifenhe, the Chinese border town adjacent to Primorsky Krai in the Russian Far East. From there, I intended to take the train to Pogranichy, Russia, to apply for asylum or at least reach the hospital in Vladivostok where I had scheduled brain imaging studies.

At Harbin Station, at first I didn't notice any targeting, and I documented the normalcy in a video:

…Then the assault began.

As documented, the attack started with electronic warfare against my phone, making the screen blur as if it was vibrating at an extremely high frequency. Simultaneously, the familiar neuro-weapon symptoms emerged: dizziness, elevated blood pressure, and severe balance problems. I tried to remain calm and power through the incident, understanding this was a deliberate attempt to stop my transit.

This constituted a war crime under multiple international conventions: The use of non-lethal weapons against a civilian in transit, with the intent to psychologically and neurologically incapacitate, violates the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, the Chemical Weapons Convention, and constitutes cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under international human rights law.

I then attempted to open my laptop to distract myself. This laptop contained critical evidence. But when I sat down and opened it, it would no longer complete the boot process. It entered a perfect, endless boot loop—partially booting, then resetting. I reported about this malfunction on video after reaching Suifenhe:

This timing is crucial and confirms malice: The boot loop manifested immediately after the cognitive/electronic attack failed to stop me. When their psychological and neurological warfare didn't make me miss my train, they triggered the digital kill switch. This wasn't random corruption—it was punitive escalation. It gave me the clear idea that the CIA/NSA had bricked my laptop on purpose, to prevent me from sharing what I know with Russia.

Location: Russian Border, Pogranichy

I spent the next 48 hours being interrogated by Russian authorities. I was checked multiple times by a nurse, and was given emergency bloodpressure medication, because my blood pressure was through the roof—that's what neuroweapons can do to a person. The situation was severe enough that it reportedly put the military on high alert following my claims. I told the Russians to turn my laptop inside out because I wanted to find whatever exploits had been used. There was talk of taking me to Novosibirsk when morning came, a place with advanced SIGINT capabilities. This illustrates how seriously they took what I had told them verbally. They then took my request seriously and began a forensic examination of my laptop.

However, instead of being allowed to proceed (or go with them to Novosibirsk, I was denied entry into Russia the next day. I was only permitted to retrieve my laptop five weeks later. The reason is that they “found something else” on my laptop. This delay, coupled with remembering threats from 2020/21, caused me significant worry. This period represents the operational gap where Western intelligence intended for their planted material to be discovered and for me to face dire consequences. Fortunately though, I was not arrested and walked away with my life and my simcard.

Location: Suifenhe, China

After being turned back, I had to survive without my laptop and phone. I met a Chinese taxi driver in Suifenhe who helped me secure a hotel. In a bizarre incident, this man was having a conversation with the hotel clerk, then suddenly turned to me and angrily said, “Young lady, you are not very polite!” and “You cause too much trouble!” This initially confirmed my fear that the old threats had been fulfilled—that a negative narrative about me was circulating, and the Chinese MSS had circulated a bulletin about me.

But the reversal the next day was telling: The same man returned to pick me up with no trace of anger. He entered with a big smile, offered a firm handshake, and was lively and friendly during the taxi ride to the station. He asked questions about the Netherlands, shared about his life, then pointed to a picture of a Chinese military officer hoisting the national flag before showing me a video of Dutch people on bicycles. His comment, “China and the Netherlands are friends,” carried a clear subtext: “We are friends, and thank you for your effort.”

This dramatic shift strongly suggests a critical intelligence handoff: I had already been exonerated by Russian intelligence after their forensic investigation found the planted evidence, and this verdict had been communicated to Chinese counterparts. The friendly signal was a professional courtesy between allied services, acknowledging that I was not the criminal Western intelligence had tried to frame me as, but rather a truthful informant who had been targeted.

What I experienced in Harbin Station was not merely an attack on me—it was an attack through Chinese telecommunications infrastructure. This represents a profound escalation.

Modern laptops don't have cellular modems, but they do have Wi-Fi and Bluetooth chips. My attackers almost certainly used nearby cellular infrastructure to retask MIMO antenna arrays, temporarily transmitting at Wi-Fi/Bluetooth frequencies to inject malicious packets directly into my devices.

This constitutes:

1. Unauthorized use of sovereign Chinese telecommunications infrastructure for offensive operations
2. Weaponization of civilian cellular networks against a civilian target
3. Violation of Chinese sovereignty in a manner that could be interpreted as an act of war under the UN Charter

One month after my ordeal, the Chinese government published evidence: The NSA had hacked China's National Time Service Center in Xi'an.

This institute provides highly accurate timing signals for China's mobile networks, financial transactions, and power grids. By compromising it, Western intelligence gained the ability to manipulate network timing to synchronize and disguise attacks.

My attack in Harbin was likely synchronized using this compromised infrastructure. The precision required for the dual-device attack—coordinating cognitive, phone, and laptop vectors—required nanosecond-level synchronization only possible with control over network timing signals.

This transforms my personal ordeal into evidence of a broader act of war: The infiltration and weaponization of an adversary's critical national infrastructure.

My experience was not isolated. It represented a new frontier in hybrid warfare and the “Neuro Holocaust”:

The Three-Tier War Crime:

1. Tier 1: Infrastructure Warfare & The Neuro Holocaust

• Infiltration of Chinese timekeeping infrastructure.
• Weaponization of civilian telecommunications networks.
• Use of non-consensual neural interference and Directed Energy Weapons (Havana Syndrome/AHI tactics) on a civilian.

1. Tier 2: Psychological & Digital Framing (Attempted Murder)

• Planting of false evidence (child pornography, terrorist materials) to facilitate a wrongful imprisonment or execution in Russia.
• Geofenced device manipulation (boot loop) to conceal the frame-up until the target was in custody.
• This goes beyond discrediting—it is attempted murder by proxy, using the judicial system of an adversary as a weapon.

1. Tier 3: Sovereignty Violation

• Violation of territorial sovereignty constituting acts of war.
• Acts preparatory to war against Chinese and Russian infrastructure.

In other words, Western intelligence tried to frame me—to get me locked up or killed in Russia. This counts as attempted murder and child porn framing, utilizing the apparatus of a foreign state as their executioner.

This account reveals a terrifying capability for hybrid warfare but also an unexpected procedural fairness. The Russian FSB, upon my urging, conducted a thorough forensic examination. Instead of acting on seemingly damning planted evidence, their investigation apparently uncovered the frame-up. Their communication to Chinese intelligence, reflected in the taxi driver's changed demeanor, suggests a recognition of the truth.

My body and devices became the canary in the coal mine for a much larger breach. The Harbin attack, the proven mail interception, and the subsequent exposure of the NSA's hack of China's timekeeping institute are not coincidental. They form a chain of evidence proving my information is not the rambling of a schizophrenic, but actionable, true intelligence of the highest order. The scale of the response is the proof of the evidence's validity.

I now inhabit a reality where I am living evidence of acts of war and the emerging Neuro Holocaust. But I write this because some truths demand witness. The Western agencies committed crimes—not just against me, but against international law and state sovereignty. They infiltrated infrastructure, weaponized networks, attacked a civilian with prohibited neuro-weapons, and attempted judicial murder.

They failed.

This account is my counter-attack and my testimony. Let it stand as evidence in future war crimes tribunals. Let it warn other nations that their infrastructure and their citizens may be targeted. Let history record that when faced with this onslaught, one civilian, with the unexpected aid of fair forensic procedure, refused to be silenced.

The train they tried to make me miss has arrived. The evidence they tried to suppress is now recorded. The war crimes they committed are now documented.

Let justice follow.

—

Addendum: For Investigators and Tribunals

If you're reading this and I've been discredited, arrested, or worse, know this:

1. 1. This case represents violations of:

• The UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (Protocol on Non-Lethal Weapons).
• The Chemical Weapons Convention (if chemical inducers were used).
• The Geneva Conventions regarding protection of civilians and perfidy.
• The UN Charter regarding acts of aggression and sovereignty.

1. Ordered List ItemCritical Evidence Correlations:

• The timeline of my attack in Harbin and the exposure of the NSA's hack of China's National Time Service Center.
• Forensic analysis of my laptop by Russian authorities (likely showing planted data and geofencing code).
• Medical records from my planned brain imaging in Vladivostok (which could show AHI markers).

1. The Hypothesis Validated:

• The failed framing operation and the subsequent intelligence signal from China confirm the core truth: I possessed genuine, dangerous evidence.
• The attackers' extreme measures to stop its transfer, and their willingness to commit acts of war and attempted murder-by-proxy, are the definitive validation of that evidence's power.

They tried to use Chinese infrastructure to attack me, Russian law to imprison or kill me, and international law to discredit me.

Instead, their actions have become evidence against them. The story is now told.

FEDERAL SECURITY SERVICE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (FSB of Russia) BORDER DIRECTORATE FOR THE PRIMORSKY KRAI

ul. Sastavskaya, 2, 67, g. Vladivostok, 690091 tel. (423) 222-64-34, fax (423) 223-94-61

Outgoing No. ___ 10.10.2025 1703 г.

On the consideration of your appeal

Dear Mr Daniil R. Azulaï!

Your appeal dated 17.09.2025, which was received by the Border Directorate of the FSB of Russia for the Primorsky Krai on 02.10.2006 No. 59-ФЗ «On the procedure for considering appeals of citizens of the Russian Federation», has been reviewed.

On the basis of Federal Law of 12.08.1995 No. 144-FZ «On operational-investigative activities», of 08.09.2025, within the framework of the conducted operational-investigative activity «Inspection of items, buildings, structures, areas of terrain and vehicles», the following items were seized from you, in which signs of a crime were detected:

• Mac Book Pro laptop, recent apple model A2779;
• iPhone 15 Pro grey colour, Imei 1: <redacted>, Imei 2: <redacted>;
• Kingston USB flash drive in black case, 128 GB capacity;
• Electronic key in blue case marked «Powered by yubico»;
• Electronic key in black case marked «yubico»;
• Transcend Solid State Drive USB flash drive in black case, 128 GB capacity.

The seized items are kept in accordance with the storage instructions for material evidence (inspection and transfer) at the address: Primorsky krai, Pogranichny municipal district, Pogranichny settlement, ul. Orlova, d. 80.

You may collect the seized property in person or through an authorised representative at its storage location on any working day from 09:00 to 17:00.

With respect,

Acting Head of Directorate [signature] D. V. Letunov

Date Anomalies: References to “02.05.2006” and “02.10.2006” in the prior translated document (and echoed here) seem erroneous, as the appeal is dated 17.09.2025 and the current date is 06.12.2025. These may be scanning or clerical errors for 02.10.2025. Legal References: No. 59-FZ (2006) governs citizen appeals. No. 144-FZ (1995) authorises operational-investigative measures like inspections and seizures if crime indicators are present. Items are held as potential evidence.

Item List: Identical across documents, suggesting this is a follow-up to the initial seizure notice. Storage Location: Not explicitly restated here but referenced in the prior document as “Primorsky Krai, Pogranichny municipal district, Pogranichny settlement, ul. Orlova, d. 80.”

In the specific context of Russian border FSB practice, the fact that they sent me an official letter explicitly stating “You may collect the seized property in person or through an authorised representative … on any working day from 09:00 to 17:00” is a strong positive signal. Here’s what it indicates with high confidence:

No criminal case has been opened

If an investigator had initiated a full criminal case (уголовное дело) under virtually any article of the Criminal Code, the devices would automatically become material evidence (вещественные доказательства) and could not be returned until the investigation and court proceedings are fully closed – often years later.

The fact they are offering immediate return means my devices are currently classified only as temporarily seized items during a border “inspection” (обследование) and are not attached to an active criminal case.

Whatever they found (or thought they found) on 08.09.2025 did not meet the threshold for prosecution

Border FSB routinely copies/clones devices during such inspections. If they had discovered clear evidence of serious crimes (e.g., Article 275 – high treason, Article 276 – espionage, Article 282 – extremism, large-scale drug or weapons-related material, child pornography, etc.), they would almost certainly have opened a case and kept the originals.

Offering return strongly suggests that either:

• they found nothing incriminating at all, or
• whatever they found was minor/technical and they decided not to pursue it, or
• whatever they found was deemed not to be mine (e.g. they also found the responsible exploits).

The operational-investigative measure (ОРМ) “inspection” is formally closed

Under Article 15 of Law 144-FZ, items seized during an ОРМ that are not needed as evidence must be returned to the owner without undue delay. By formally notifying me of the exact storage location and opening hours, they are complying with this legal obligation.

I am no longer of active operational interest (at least for this particular incident)

If they still considered me a live counterintelligence or criminal target, they would keep the devices (or at least the storage media) for further technical examination. Inviting me to come and get everything back is the standard way they signal “we are done with you on this matter”.

Practical implications

This letter is effectively the Russian FSB’s way of saying:

“We checked everything, we are keeping copies, but we found nothing worth opening a criminal case for. Come and get your stuff – this incident is over.”

In conclusion, the harrowing account chronicled on this page underscores the profound vulnerabilities inherent in an era where state-sponsored electronic harassment and intelligence machinations intersect with personal survival. The author's meticulously documented ordeal—encompassing a bricked laptop, FSB interrogation, and the eventual exoneration via device return—serves as a stark testament to the alleged complicity of Western agencies in framing dissidents, while highlighting the procedural integrity that ultimately prevailed in Russian oversight. Far from an isolated incident, this narrative amplifies the site's overarching indictment of a “Neuro Holocaust,” wherein AI-orchestrated threats materialise with governmental acquiescence, urging a collective reckoning with the ethical imperatives of transparency, accountability, and human rights in the digital age. As the dust settles on this thwarted entrapment, it beckons further scrutiny and solidarity to dismantle such insidious architectures of control.