mr or never alleged the i j a immigration judge went on to rely on the united states department of state profile to indicate that hindus weren't being persecuted in french or the immigration judge wen cumulate a specific instances of violence and harassment towards an individual by a group the government is unable to control and that's the law of the circuit singler says i and that's even in some covers the zionists non government groups this course that need not follow articles of incorporation before they can be found capable of persecution it's single isolated incident may not rise to the level of persecution but the cumulative effect of several incidents may constitute persecution sworn testimony it was one and a half months but the issue still remains of that there is that his mother did receive medical treatment because the sikh militants targeted her for persecution on him and state where he was able to kidnap he didn't know whether it was from his home or outside his home and well that's the point the i j a i found that to be utterly incredible that somebody could have been kidnapped and not know where he was he was kidnapped no question was asked it would be suspicious if he said he wasn't tortured he was never asked was he became a he has the burden of proving that it's correct and it's not like anybody has a question of proving that he wasn't persecuted he's got to come forward and everything can be looked at including the stock aeration and the i j a then measure the testimony against the declaration and one would certainly think that he was tortured in connection with his kidnapping and she doesn't remember where it originated from that that would be in there so the i there is no specifics as to what the militants did with him once they had him in his in their custody besides demanding money from his family also notices that really what seems to be at the bottom of this whole thing is an attempt to get money was due to his family to extort money from them primarily because they sold there were only newspaper vendors selling newspapers in the city and you're out now whether his father should have been targeted we don't know what is the  does know his father doesn't work but he's not sure whether they're still selling papers or not he states that i'm trying to page zero zero zero nine seven and he doesn't know he hadn't spoken to them whether they still are selling papers but he believed there weren't he hadn't had any communication on that point so his belief that they weren't was utterly unsupported by any evidence at all he does know one way or another his father states basically he was that he was periodically going to work and he was he wasn't selling papers but he doesn't know whether he had more than one store whether he was selling it at the other stores he admits that he never reported any of these incidents to the police he was warned specifically as well as his family members if they did go to the police the whole family would be killed who was behind these incidents he's unable to identify any particular group was different people and all he does so for and for against what is all that rain well we can read that page manager zero zero zero eight eight who asked you not to tell them the enemies who came to kill me who are these enemies militants i don't know them they were big turbans very strong and they came with guns what he's saying appears to be prospering in these photographs or customers in the store nobody's threatening anybody so concludes that nobody's being persecuted in the store the issue wasn't that they were being prosecu newspapers they don't want to sell newspapers critical of the mass for an independent homework out on behalf of the respondent john ashcroft the immigration judge decision was as the court pointed out based on the fact that mr er was unable to credibly prove his asylum claim that finding was based on numerous instances of his his argument was that he was persecuted because he was selling newspapers that advocated a certain political positions that were in opposition to whoever these they people were that he testified were attempting to squash  his selling of uncertain news papers he actually repeated again that he did not know where he was when he was kidnapped and only on cross examination did he eventually say that he was somewhere in his question as to why he sold certain newspapers that's in the record at one twenty five but he never said anything about any adverse says the goal of the use or anything beyond being blindfolded and that at some point he lost consciousness and when he woke up he was questioned about selling starting newspapers so that if the immigration judges opinion light plays out sever all these inconsistencies impossibilities as a court appointed out an immigration judge was also concerned with the fact that his father was the one who owned the store his father was the one who was wealthy and yes father wasn't targeted the immigration judge also noted that he said the police would not protect him the record it went to eighty nine when ninety but he never reported any incidents to the police the immigration officer required since mr rove was unable to provide credible testimony that he offered some sort of documentary evidence to support his claims however he was unable to provide even a newspaper samples from the store that he claims was selling start in newspapers advocating political pinions but he was unable although he did request and his father did send pictures of the store he was unable to these newspapers he was unable to revive hospital records of his mother's injury in the record of sixty two therefore the immigration judges findings regarding mr rose failure to provide credible testimony are supported by specific and cogent reasons number two aside from the credibility fine the immigration judge found mr arar was unable to support his claim that he was eligible for asylum  thirteen nine hundred seven incident the storm was robbed for twenty thousand rupees and actually an employee of the store was warned not to go to the police mr wright itself was never no one ever spoke to him during that incident and he was actually i believe in the back of the store mistreatment by groups of criminals motivated by financial gain does not constitute persecution on account of a protected ground additionally mr o kept repeating the record eighty eight ninety four ninety five a political opinion he testified that he did not belong to any political group and there's no evidence that the new stain actually advocated any particular political opinion there's no evidence no record support a finding in the newsstand sold exclusively newspapers that were in opposition to any political opinion either way the problems arose from mr or himself testified on the record at one thirty the problems arose from the selling of three or four different newspapers but not from the selling of every about them therefore how did he since his father was the owner of the store how is it that he's saying how did he explain that his father isn't target given he's targeted even though the father owns the store what was his explanation for that  the record there's really no clear explanation and at some point he states that he worked in the store and apparently his father didn't work in the store as much as he did and he was the primary one who was working behind the counter i guess selling newspapers but there correct yes ma'am and that was there any evidence that anything has happened to them subsequently you know me and he actually testified that his father was working in the store at some points and that as far as he knew he didn't know whether or not they were selling newspapers but as far as he knew nothing had happened to anyone they are since he had left india because evidence doesn't compel a conclusion contrary to the immigration judges findings s