has already been found by both the immigration judge and by the board of immigration appeals in each one of their own proceedings the immigration judge found that he met the objective and fear standard when he was asked who these people were he said they were primarily islamic fundamentalists and communists and the court and the government seized and that's meant to distort the record and and let's assume that the regime is somewhat autocratic the person because of his or her opposition to the regime he's imprisoned because of that political opposition the person escapes from prison or is released from prison but with a very clear understanding that if you continue if you put your political opposition we will imprison you again because of your political opposition to the regime that person comes to the united states does that person have grounds for question is whether is he whether he is a persecutor to apply the same definition of persecution in deciding what he's done as we do the definition of persecution someone coming here seeking asylum because he or she has been  was just an opinion they held it was because they were trying to overthrow the government they the testimony was that they were planning to overthrow the government and they were working with the khamenei people to try to overthrow the government and i think history shows exactly what everything is political and you can't live in berkeley i understand if very well then we've got in mind when a person when we have hinted that every action that a person takes liberation army in a democratic country that's different from political opposition to an outcry to a country where democratic change is difficult or impossible i mean that's our case law i understand however i am sure that if we  respond to your question the the bottom line was these people were imprisoned for their criminal acts not because they were opposed to an autocratic government and there was no testimony there was no evidence whatsoever in this  law at the time and that he was reporting on individuals activities that would be political in this in this country and that because of their incarceration that would be in the judge's opinion someone he doesn't fall under this exception why what why is this persecution are simply the incarceration of people who are trying to overthrow the government because there's no indication at least i don't remember any indication in the record that hey we're actually taking substantial steps to overthrow that and the shah i mean to me it was more than through what do you prove that they were persecuted i think you said i think it was that they were ahead  and sentiment not necessarily they were going to overthrow them understood they were convicted of sedition well your honor they may have convicted under suspicion but who knows what that was at the time the evidence in the record doesn't seem to really indicate that they were  persecution of any person on account of race religion nationality membership in a particularly special group of political and it doesn't talk about what will happen if that person that he actually persecutes hate and they overthrow the government and wors want to go back to the point persecution atha time that these two men were informed upon and then went to prison because it is persecution and if they in anti government activities because of their political viewpoints if the government and this is i think just our case law if the government against homelier protesting against whom they are working does not allow avenues persecuted these people and there's also a case that i believe he said it in our brief matter of i don't have the cite in front of me but it's in our brief where and elian was an afghan his brother was a that was considered persecution i mean this is in the records that and i'm i have to say that i do not remember specifically but it appeared to me that he did not neither of these people were  ayatollah in the ayatollah hadn't been imprisoned with the ayatollah have been entitle to political asylum here not extensively the state department producer state department reports have reports every year and if the government wanted to submit country reports on what iran was like in one thousand seven hundred nine or one nine hundred eighty or in any time all they next case is zero two seventy two one zero four however the immigration judg they just call them dirty names that wouldn't be  employed by the city or the government and his wife was too and then they lost her job but he didn't say really why or when they had lost their jobs and then he said he had started a business that had been unable to get a license his family and eight others or sixty nine lothian families were taken off a bus had their documents checked were taken to a police station and were held overnight and  incident does not arise to a level of persecution of persecution it's been called an extreme concept that though we might find this type behavior unacceptable in the united states is not to the extent of maybe and i don't think so because you later on goes on to talk about how you those able to start a business i mean he didn't get paid whatever he needed to things like france or whatever but he said he was able to start a business and he remain discrimination and not persecution and you don't rise to that level under this course case law and we would state that if you have not met his burden of past persecution and because of the the changes in the laws and in law there's no he a long period of time also there's no indication that she ever worked in mafia i mean she was born in russia she left in one when mr crane was one years old and then return until he was seventeen so there's no indication that she would have thought so there's nothing in there that says that you can plan a job or anything like that you know he was basically speaking to what was going on in him when he laughed and there's nothing to indicate that now that would be the case i mean the lothian government has taken pains to