issues related to petitioners fear of an opposition to genital cutting of their daughter we reserve eight minutes rebuttal this court should reverse the immigration judge's decision because it is finding that mr unenthused two does not have a well founded the same report notes increasing intolerance of political dissent as well as targeting of opposition parties the independent press and members of the ethiopian human rights council in one thousand nine hundred sixty eight partment country report noted that serious human rights problems remain and mention reports that political detainees were beaten or mistreated the immigration judge ignored the one nine hundred ninety four i announced profile on ethiopian asylum claims statement that the government keeps its opponents off balance by arresting some ignoring others holding some until they renounce violence and holding some even though they have renounced violence this report also includes an expert opinion that it i impossible to predict who the government will imprison and the immigration judge disregarded reports by nongovernmental organizations such as amnesty international and the un commission on human rights which state that the government has dean machine was formed in the early one nine hundred ninety s it is a multi ethnic anti government organization which has been banned from operating in ethiopia some of its members have been persecuted by the government some of its members ha with the i j a fact finding that all of these activities occurred after the proceedings were coming against him to begin deportation and the immigration judge concluded that essentially he was engaging in these he he speculated on that and i feel that was essentially speculation and no more i think if we look at mr used to the activities in context including the fact that as early as high school he was politically active indeed was in prison for political activity i don't think we can just make an inference based soley on timing that there's an opportunistic motive for his joining this organization through as a matter of fact that he did got engaged in the activities in the united states that he's seeking to rely on after deportation proceedings were payments against him will be joining in the dean and the community organisations in ethiopia that's correct but i would note that he did come to the united states on a scholarship provided by the derg regime which is now is opposed it was opposed brutal military dictatorship his family including father stepmother  sister and cousin who were identified with the derg and were were persecuted because of it experienced events some of which occurred before he came here so they are there are factors occurring before h would also show that they they have some concern about why he's here and whether he's a person of interest to them because they believe political activity or are beliefs that are against their own legitimate interest in and what their reason for being here i would point out that he came on the scholarship of the previous government the difficulties his wife experienced and the question she experienced occurred under the current government but that doesn't explain why they wouldn't have a legitimate interest when you have to establish that no reasonable fact finder could reach a different result and you're telling us why well maybe the fact that they're interested has been bad connotations but it may be very with gentlemen as well but that is but one fact that would need to be look remedies before we have jurisdiction to review the claim yes i would take you under the under the under the case law of this at this point has never found and yes you do not exhaust well let me put issues on eligibility that would remain if you find a wealth and if you are of the female genital cutting then the issue is female genital cutting persecution is it on account of one of the five because he actually not derivative claims what we're talking about this is been explored by the b i this is just all post hearing argument and you may be quite correct but it's never been bound to follow it and i totally understand that but the case has a wonderful footnote where it says you know those who were burning people at the stake during the inquisition that they were doing it for their good too and yet we wouldn't doubt that that's religious persecution the fact that we're talking about an already christian does that make a difference or that there are groups within the country that you know practice it or at least not to the degree that others do you know i'm christian  family is from yes your honor thank you for raising that issue that is in the state department department of state profile for nine hundred ninety five but that statement is prefaced with the fact that it depends not only has extended family particular facts of this case for so this court should affirm the board regarding the political opinion because the evidence in this case does not compel reversal on the claim and if it reaches beyond those two issues any additional issues it should remain and or for the board to decide in the first  instance reasonable fact finder would not be compelled to reverse the denial petitioners political opinion claim which is based partly on petitioners activities and partly on a theory of imputed opinion and of course  test we cited in our briefs arkansas versus oklahoma and also saying our quoting american textile manufacturers in terms of petitioners activities there is evidence supporting the board's determination that would be sufficient and i think that is the case here in terms of petitioners actual activities he was in well judge person i think you're referring to us in evidence that has to do with a particular conference that was held there and this is what happened to you know people or national leaders of different organizations this is not anywhere near that you know level of importance in the organization so i don't think there is any use this to think that he would be arrested in the first place but if you were arrested certainly the record would suggest that he wouldn't be released he also overthrow apparently not its other relatives have difficulty with the regime his father is still receiving a government pension that's page one thirty three of the administrator her record  fact he was able to renew his passport in november of ninety ninety one after the regime resists regime change that's page one thirty six of the record without apparently having to pay a bribe or you know doing anything out of the ordinary and i think we've already discussed the allegations that there was a stranger about his wife having difficulties getting a view so that in fact that's very understandable considering the fact that the government ethiopia was paying for him to come here and study hoping to get benefits when he returned and in fact if his wife left to join him it was become more immigration judge rely on that that's mentioned fifty three in the record in his decision and the first two to seventy three in the record now now the subject has already come up about the record also saying five are not likely to have been subjected to this practice now i mean this is coming from of course i don't recall the exact date but it's you know i don't want anyone to go right ok roughly ten years ago but we don't have any way amount of cross referencing happens to that group a certain kind of christian or rural or urban and so on without any particular reference to these people can we have testimony from the father that he fears that if he is for example in prison or otherwise ok my point is it throws it back on what you know the mother and the mother has testified in her own right and i've already mentioned what what she said and why so the only thing she's with the only thing she said is that if she unwilling she will be ostracized she doesn't say i can i come out i will or i won't the word willing is introduced in the question if you are unwilling what will happen well what will happen is i will be ostracized she says it happened to her and she's opposed to the idea of it happening to her daughter and those statements connected with this statement and connected to these other aspects of the record we believe are enough  assuming that we can determine with some degree of certainty as you're arguing we cannot from this testimony that there is some chance that it will happen how high is that chance acquired to be twenty percent chance of not thirty percent chance about fifty only what's the percentage chance is required for their them to me to get over the hurdle so we certainly don't require certain  well i think that  if you're uncomfortable with percentages how likely is it necessary that most urban women under the age of twenty five are likely to be mutilated reportedly women are able to prevent their daughters from being subjected to circumcision by relatives all that taken together i think there's no question  not as being more likely than not that something as low as ten percent how does this status for whatever you've read speak to that standard i think that it satisfies the standard your honor because most of the same as ninety percent well it's just different factors combined so i mean they're not they're not all numeric be more helpful to the court if i attempt to move on to the question about the venture every man and if that's acceptable but issues of race the number of arguments why as parents they should get asylum then it is have been to cabin to ensure the three categories there doesn't seem to be any basis for any such cabin ng in the actual language of the insurer which seems to be quite general  asylum have not been reviewed by the board in fact they they weren't decided by the immigration judge they were raised to the board as well and in each of these cases if the if they did go back to the board we can say that a reasonable ok well the main the main issue i think in that we think is the most appropriate for email and would be this concept that a parent can get asylum based on the parents persecution but but they have also raised i think of the girl might consist of but in terms of ostracism of the parents that really wasn't fleshed out at all the idea that the parents and and the children can be combined issue that family unit as a whole must be recognized if we assume that the daughter has a reasonable fear of future persecution without any input at all from the administrative you're very briefly