current country conditions because at the time that the judge made his decision saddam hussein and the bath government had only recently been overthrown well at that time we were also optimistic that the future would you better for iraqis and as we all know and that served in the dues and read in the papers that circumstances have not improved in fact in particular to christians and they're quite brutal so why hasn't this case been reopened because this is what is happening in the san diego immigration court where the negative credibility finding and the case is real open for change country conditions the judges almost invariably say i didn't i didn't because that in believing the first time and i'm going in i am going to deny him again and affirm my decision no matter what the country conditions are because i didn't believe him until the board of the ninth circuit addresses the credibility findings of this case is a nonstarter if that's all the evidence that we have in this record how does that demonstrate we're sunni past persecution never mind the credibility question at this moment how does that demonstrate that there's been a change country conditions that have eliminated his well founded fear of persecution it looks to me like his record just to bear of information perhaps well in fact yes we do need additional information regarding current country conditions to see whether he has a well thought out for six years and didn't have information that showed country conditions were wonderful that's correct they had nothing they just let saddam fell that's the end of it that's pretty that's correct it's no longer and if this client earth this petitioners found credible then he has established past persecution which automatically raises the presumption he has a well founded fear of future persecution and the third is just from the petitioner to the government and the government doesn't have to show that the bath party is going to harm them about the government has to show that it's safe for him to return and that we believe they will not be able running around deciding things like that in the first instance if you are right i mean if you just think i might put words in your mouth if it is true that b i is wrong about duty i believe and when it came to the arguments because we raised all of these arguments with the board however i hope that we can accomplish more than just a simple remain to the board so that it can get decision on these things  petitioner an opportunity to explain and if that explanation is plausible and believable in a court must accept it and that's what happened repeatedly in this case but the judge didn't recognize those plausible explanations rather h could happen they could simply send it to the judge in complete making only a comment or two about the credibility well let me examine the whole thing instead of the judge and change the decision or affirm it but we can't make decisions based on on your is wrong now you you now decide this case applying the correct law and that's their job in the first instance or we can or we can look at we can look at the back to the court now any comments just simply remand but without any comment regarding credibility we have no idea what the board is going to do with it too many things which may not result in the solution to the case i think that you're correct in that you can make a comment that there appears to be a problem with the credibility findings but they did not address the heart of the matter that the judge did not believe the plausible and consistent explanations that the  on the reasons why good no crime correct but the boy decides oh yeah the credibility reasons were good enough and therefore he wasn't credible and my objective is to get it sooner than later and i would like to get it from this court or at a minimum that this court give instructions to the board and state that the credibility determinations by the judge  was related to political matters based on the saddam hussein government and that government was overthrown indeed before the immigration judge even entered his opinion in this case there were three incidents first he was arrested by police he said a police gang and the security south party members not because of his religion he testified that he was being tutored in math by one of his teachers and there were some other students and they were s was because they accused him of writing pamphlets and distributing pamphlets in on behalf of this political party it's he wasn't picked up because he was suspected of being  acting on behalf of this opposition political party that was the reason that was in ninety two in one thousand nine hundred four he was arrested and accused in an incident that he described in his testimony the police the story in order to blackmail his family they accuse them in their store of selling outdated goods and possibly laundering money that's what he said the police were trying you know so it's corrupt police officials he was hal dimensionally his father paid a fine or a bribe and the police released him and finally when he was in his technical school the fedayeen saddam fedayeen saddam wanted to recruit him to their fanatical organization people based on saddam hussein's order and that's what they did i mean that's just not prince christian principles i think that would oppose that it would be most faiths i would think and even people who aren't  devout in any faith i think would oppose those goals now because saddam's government was overthrown before this case was even finished the petitioner and his last hearing the immigration judge that isn't are you aware saddam was overthrown and the bath party was overthrown yes not yet so he gave him a chance what do you fear and he said his testimony was he fears and i mean this is the quote muslim people that's their way killing in deceiving they would do anything to put anybody in trouble and they accuse people of false accusations and they ask for bribes in return for not doing so to you that's just one ninety nation his declaration that three sixty nine to seventy three he doesn't mention it and he has written asylum application which is at three fifty six sixty eight he does say iraq among all of his other  doesn't mean that when the government falls everything is wonderful that's that's not the issue here your honor the question is whether because you have to show that it's wonderful you have to but he was persecuted and now you have to show that not that says even saddam had a child in question and his government yes no problem but we're assuming that he was persecuted we have to assume that he was persecuted by that government that government no longer there i know your honor i think the question is whether the evidence compelling is the conclusion that that he will not see sorry credible in the past he can appeal that again to the board the planet is going to have to look at the credibility it's lining if the board reverses it it goes back to the judge for consideration of new evidence if the  back up to this court for a proper review of the credibility of the adverse credibility finding that the judge initially made one way or the other i think that's review of that credibility determination  whether that was an appropriate basis to the knight a motion weapon i'm just suggesting that it be done in a proper way i don't think it's something respectfully i think this case can be your reactions and return without this court trying to reach a way to do that i think counsel should file that motion in the meantime he's not going to be returned he has a story from this court and i i know that the agency but as an officer of the court and present in these cases every day i can state without speculation that the judge is almost invariably state if i didn't find it credible the first time i'm not going to find party and saddam hussein are gone rather the standard is the safe to return to the country and in the machinery the ashcroft case of an afghan woman being returned to germany democratic country they found that even in that country the afghan women couldn't be returned because it was unsafe or so much so for rock and finally the judge ignored the evidence of record when he determined that the applicants returned for a living was just general because the country reports that was submitted at the time specifically stated that the syrians were fellow christians experience mob violence from muslims so it wasn't just his testimony the country report also said that non arab citizens were forced to change their ethnicity on their documents clearly showing discrimination against strong discrimination discrimination based upon