exaggerating or so that the inconsistency noted did not form a proper basis for the adverse credibility finding indeed the petitioner had established that as a hindu but when he testified in his supplemental declaration he actually minimize the harm and stated that his parents were not harmed and the error in the initial application was furthermore there were other instances of harm that he again minimize including police treatment as we argued in the brief he explained got initially in his burrs saying one thing and then something different sometimes it was saying something something different that may have increased some harm and then saying something that i decrease the harm the extent to produce the attacks were involves serious uses of force involved intends to set fire to tens or beat people  don't those go to the heart of the claim of future persecution your honor the issue here is that he plausibly explain set a jump her pair that application when he testified before the judge he was very consistent in accordance with the revised declaration which minimize the harm there is an inconsistency in that the declaration no the attack occurred while he and other congress can see it in the all following one sermon and then yes on cross examination he indicates holder this court discussed the difference between a minor inconsistencies and trivial inconsistency and stressed the the core pointed out to maybe a difference in  a possible trivial inconsistency however the court still stated that minor inconsistencies even minor inconsistencies in proper circumstances would support an adverse credibility determination as actually aggregate looking at all of the king consistencies in his discussion of excuse me let me just adjust the characters again and look at it looked at in aggregate all of these quote unquote minor inconsistency is perhaps the interruption of the text of the ceremony as in terms of timing might be looked at minor but then when you add to it the inconsistency is as is the property damage to the ten and to his uncle's house which contrary to what counsel said is a discrepancy not only within his testimony but between corroborating evidence that he submitted in support of his in support of  testified as to whether they see him and his parents in his declaration he stated that they see this six came up to him he was being hit by hockey sticks his parents were being hit instead he suddenly sa in fact to lessen the account of the harm suffered in there who are should be viewed as answering rather than reducing his for all i was stating your honor pitch only argument is essentially that we should ignore these blatant inconsistency it and instead just concentrate on the fact that they recant her claim and i would dispute that they said his claim excuse me that evidence on that basis therefore we would asked the court to find that the record does not compel a reversal of the agency's finding regarding the adverse credibility his burden of proof independent of the non credible inconsistent testimony based on the record alone he doesn't point to any bases in his brief on which to sustain his cat claim that he certainly did not religious violence and whether or not he simply because he is allegedly a member of t saudi that he would be subject to torture is speculative just based on the record alone he submitted as reported out in our brief he submitted various articles about instance between the terrorists however in both of those instances there appeared to be the the priests were there at that they were navigating the the religious differences there and beyond that he hasn't shown any evidence particularized evidence that he would be subject to torture right thank you cancel your time you're well over your time now and thank you very much discrepancy generally doesn't support that absent credibility finally which ties in to the earlier argument that i had me that many of the alleged discrepan that document i want to address the convention against torture claim where this court has noting on an abundance number of occasions when the harm stems from the action of the private actors and