shocks i do think those are sort of treatment has written the level of torture in several cases before this court and this was on page one the police and the security personnel including police involvement in beatings detention under strain husband listens and torture so i do think that sort of belies the government's argument that he would not be tortured just because it goes to reeducation and  how do you distinguish those cases from this case while you're on i think that the  the torture that's based on past based on their country conditions or what they believe happens in the country itself in the reeducation camps and also the fact that they could be in the research camp with three years they could be held without without  that is actively opposed to the government aside from the fact that he practices falun gong he has not participated in demonstrations he has not disseminated or collected anti gay chinese government found profiling gone media reports or other materials like that he has not recruited necessarily but in the same case specifically and in the south case those were individuals that engaged in activities that the chinese government particularly considered as anti government their outward expressions of anti government adversely but the fact of matter is the same country reports on page one twenty of the record suggests that the majority the vast majority of falun gong practitioners are punished administratively they're not jailed they're not necessarily torture they're not beaten the the record would suffice to say it was that suggest that it's not merely rising to the level of persecution which this court has that persecution needs to be something more than mere harassment needs to be i mean if it can be a lot of things but it needs to be substantial means to be more than just being bothered and also specifically in this case and also in the sounds in cases there needs to be a showing that this individual petitioner was selectively pursued that the government has a particular interest in this person in this case the facts show that the petitioner was last visit or least his family's home was last visit by the police in two thousand and this was two thousand and three when the immigration judge is making his decision this three years where there's absolutely no interest in  case i'm having difficulty distinguishing it can you help me with that again in saying it was an issue where the petitioner engaged in outwardly clear anti government activities by disseminating profiling in the government sites he happened to leave that it can if you will it can being in time but hasn't he met the standard of proof necessary for withholding every move under yang no your honor you don't think so  why is that specifically because i consider those that are similarly situated to mr yallow as compared to mr zine and the leader not in his situation and compared to the discussion and sanctions out of what it means to and in the country port in terms of who is targeted do you agree with that i could agree with that the facts in the record don't suggest exactly what he did other than claiming to be an assistant leader there's nothing to suggest exactly what that involves and it's important to no that no one else in mr zangs group in his individual group has been subjected to any persecution that's in the record no one else was arrested and it's also unclear from the record in this case whether mr assange himself the leader was arrested on a kind of asylum long practice it's it's possible it's an inference but he initially went to beijing to just stay in the demonstrations and request that the government recognize falun gong that was in april yet he was allowed to go free until september one thousand nine hundred other he was not  practitioners while subjected to a mass propaganda campaign and pressures from community and other friends coworkers things like that there's no suggestion that they are persecuted to the same level as  them it's a question of whether or not he is still of interest to them and it's curious in terms of what exactly they wanted to talk to him about and again this is a question of whether or not that rises to the level of persecution he's not going not claiming past persecution you  and then from there on it was basically just on chinese national holidays i soon they were expecting to find him at home and then the chinese government basically gave up on the sound of things in terms of the record that you know of itself shows that they do not have a particular as interestin torture ok if you do decide you can do it twenty eight years later please be sure you comply with the rules on that we've noticed an increasing tendency of late for shall i say clever attorneys to use twenty eight  language to basically supplemental a brief the case a letter is have a very limited and specific purpose so if you're confine it to that we would of course happy be happy to receive it and say think of the government so you all set then i'm very happy to comply thank you very much you're very good thank you both for your argument the case vs new case he is submitted and we will now hear the case of mover says from casey for fifteen minutes