times by the military and by the police he saw his uncle killed his older brother kidnapped and severely beaten another brother was killed by opposition political party and his sister was raped by the police yes yet the immigration statement should have been in cricket and was was that it was the expression of his opinion that the behind due to the constant oppression by the government have no stake in the future of independent bangladesh and was expression of this frustration arising from the realisation that by the immigration judge that your position that a contrary finding is compelled by the evidence yes because everything everything in the record clearly indicates that he had political opinion and several political opinions yes the immigration judge bluntly stated that he has no political opinion whatsoever which is inconsistent with everything that he testified to and everything else is on the record for example he was he was one of the leaders of the organizer of several demonstrations just conducting the hunger strike and they were forcibly removed by the police the police told them where they could legally conduct their protest and they decided to defy the police orders that would be political wish to overcome respondents in their response council in their brief describe it as the police justifiably attempting to control a violent quote unquote profanity laced event consisting of threats to quote unquote overthrow the government investment of the long term consequences to the future of bangladesh or to any country which which exploits minor minority groups in this manner this was that that is the context that needs to be taken and it obvious i mean they have no weapons they have no m there they are stricken with poverty the fact in the take this threat literally is almost absurd i believe in the context and what he was doing was trying to get exposure to the plight of the biharis which no one seems to care about brothers was kidnapped by opposition political party the army weak because of his refusal to support them in a political rally which also didn't anya testified that only his brother was taken or not the others because they got angry with brother they had an argument with his brother but not with the others entire group that was there was not taking just his brother because they had an argument with his brother not with others as more of a personal thing as opposed to they got angry with his brother specifically because his brother refused to provide political support his brother was of the political opinion that this group is not deserving of his political support which is which which i believe amounts to persecution on  control the severity of the ongoing conflict and tension between the government and opposition parties and the various ruling parties are clearly reflected in the concrete conditions and by the department of state reports and all of a quote crime of opportunity committed by roque police officers and not the act of persecution by the government and not connected to her being at the heart of this was this is incorrect on both points first abusiveness and corruption part of the the immigration judge in the board in this matter although petitioners counsel has offered various possibly reasonable explanations for different conclusions in this case he has pointed to nothing that compels the contrary conclusion the state department report states there is no evidence that the hari's are specific targets of police abuse or other mistreatment in bangladesh and concerning i think what your honor was getting to a minute ago about regulations and how protests are held the immigration judge did ask the petitioner about that are there regulations what are you allowed to do what do you are you allowed to protest at all and in fact the petitioner in a sense complained that they are required to protest in a peaceful manner that's on page two hundred ninety of the record and i sounded to me like petition was conceding in fact that there was violence at every one of these protests the hunger strike he admitted that it was held where it wasn't allowed the police said we want you to do that in your camp and they refused to do that that was in pushed and jostled the embassy guards at that point he was arrested he's involved in illegal activities then the next  profanity being used he said we were swearing i guess it's possible that they were swearing as opposed to using bad language but you know any of that what the petitioner testified was they were talking over the microphone saying whatever the policeman came and removed the microphones and the people in the demonstration started stoning the police unit that it was a riot so again he was arrested from the record clearly shows that each time the petition each of the three times petition was arrested he was involved in some kind of riot or wasn't obeying police orders now the fact that he may have been or whatever treatment he received when he was in custody and we did say in our brief is not evidence of persecution or that he was singled out unfortunately bangladesh as the country report states is one of the poorest countries in the world and frankly bangladeshi police generally don't treat any of their detainees well but i guess in the least well the petitioner here at least was only detained in each case for about twenty four hours so it's not a sort of situation where he was detained for weeks and that sort of thing he was released after twenty four hours in each case now there's no evidence that the rape of his sister was not a crime of opportunity his testimony was she went outside the camp to get water they can go during certain hours she went towards the end of the time and eventually the water runs out there were only a few people there camps for some of the young children when he moved to a different camp he became as he said sort of a secretary in an office within the camp and the state department and also he's fluent in bengali which is not and then since he's been in the united states bangladesh and the sea renew that passport i don't think there's any better evidence of citizenship in the country than having that country issue a passport so i don't think there's any question that th thank you very much thank you common including the existence of a black market in that context the passport is merely a travel document by no means is it in kind implicit recognition or validation of the rights associated with becoming a citizen and fact of the matter is being arm considering all the possibilities of what what my struck mr rahman was involved in the nature of his activities which clearly were political so if nothing else that alone i believe compels a reversal of the decision because