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 the author terms 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 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.

In 2025 I was being harassed to such an extent that I decided to try to appeal for refugee status in Russia. I traveled through Harbin, China to Suifenhe, China. From there I took the train to Pogranichy, a Russian border town, to attempt to apply for refugee status, or at least visit the hospital in Vladivostok where I had made an appointment for brain imaging studies, in an attempt to get clarity on whether or not I have traces of Havana Syndrome / AHI.

Right before taking the train to Suifenhe, a Chinese border town on the edge of Primorsky Krai in the Russian far-East, I was waiting inside Harbin railway station.

At first I didn't notice any targeting, and I took this video:

Then it started to happen. Electronic warfare was used on my phone, making the screen blur as if it was vibrating very fast. Then I started getting the familiar symptoms such as dizzyness, high blood pressure, and balance problems. I tried to keep myself calm and power through the incident.

I then wanted to open my laptop to have something to do. This laptop had much evidence on it. But when I sat down and opened it up, it would no longer complete the boot process. It would partially boot, then reset back to the start, an endless boot loop. This gave me the idea that the CIA/NSA had bricked my laptop on purpose, to prevent me from sharing what I know with Russia. This video proves this:

I then spent 48 hours being interrogated by the Russians. I will detail the full story of what happened in Russia later, it was quite revealing (military on high alert after my claims).

Suffice to say, I told the Russians to turn my laptop inside out because I wanted to find whatever exploits had been used. They did. Unfortunately, instead of being allowed on my way, I was suddenly not allowed to enter Russia, and only allowed to pick up my laptop 5 weeks later. That's when I remembered the threats from 2020/21 and became very worried.

Later, I met a Chinese taxi driver who was helping me to get back to Shanghai by guiding me through Suifenhe and making sure I had a hotel. This man was having a conversation with the hotel clerk. Then he suddenly turned to me and said “Young lady, you not very polite!” and became angered. That confirmed for me that the old threats must have been fulfilled.

However, the very next day this man came back to pick me up from the hotel. There was no trace of his earlier anger. Instead he came in with a big smile and gave me a firm handshake. In the taxi on the way to the station, he was lively and very friendly, asking me all kinds of questions about the Netherlands and making comments about his own life. He then pointed to a picture of a Chinese military officer hoisting the Chinese flag, and then showed me a video of Dutch people on bycicles. He commented “China and the Netherlands are friends” - obviously this meant something along the lines of “we are friends, and thank you for your effort”. This strongly suggests that I had already been exonerated by Russian intelligence, and that this had been communicated to Chinese intelligence.

In other words, Western intelligence tried to frame me, to get me locked up or killed in Russia. So this counts as attempted murder and child porn framing.

I will expand this story soon, there's a lot more to tell about what happened in China as well (I suspect I got help from Chinese intelligence on my way to Russia).

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.