decision of the immigration judge without opinion whatsoever so it is the opinion of the immigration judge to which i will direct my arguments that is found in the record at pages forty seven through fifty five  here is whether the agency was entitled to conclude that what happened to him did not rise to the level of persecution so i would appreciate your summarizing for me exactly what  the same individuals that stabbed him and told him to go back to india were permitted by the police to continue to occupy the bus station and actually virtually harassed mr perkins afterward with impunity and no fear of quote the legal question for us is whether it was so bad that it is as a matter of law persecution and i just have difficulty with that particularly in light of the fact that the worst of man he stayed a long long time and there was a big there there is a long list of cases that have come out of this court which shows that a pattern in practice that small instances will in fact rise to the level of persecution and those are cited in my brief would have concluded this is persecution that probably would have held up but i mean does this compel that conclusion compared to surreal and for example the other cases that follow syria but your honor i'm watching the clock and really what i believe is a stronger issue here is the well founded future fear the court knows that asylum can be granted for either reason either the past persecution or the well thought of future fear in this case it's agree just that the immigration judges completely ignored evidence ignore credible testimony by mr percussion it ignored credible testimony by his auntie who had come to the know how do we know that the country the country reports are on the record where they know they are and so how do we know that they were ignored because their country reports for example at one forty two that even though the end of fiji and one ten percent of the vote they were kept out of the cabinet it stands at one forty five actually let me go back it also states that the constitution at this point in time was written to favor the rights of ethnic ligi and that is i believe  were taking land from the indians this is something that's happened you know historically in other parts of the world as well just because mr pre crash was here in the united states when his family was finally kicked out of the property for good doesn't mean that his well founded fear of future persecution is did i hear you right to say that the immigration judge didn't discuss the problem with future persecution he cited i read pages and pages where he's discussing that he specifically talks about well founded fear of future persecution then he goes into pages and pages on the evidence the country reports the whole thing then comes to the conclusion that he's failed to meet the burden of showing the fear of persecution w as the court has already correctly honed in on the issues here that issues the immigration judge found that there was no sufficient evidence of past persecution presented by mr prakash and therefore  evidence past persecution even if there was sufficient evidence that past persecution and there were presumption that evidence would have been rebutted by the immigration judges examination as the court has already pointed out to the country conditions showing that me you know what i'm trying to believe i saw that where he went from past persecution counted fear in the same paragraph correct your honor and i think the immigration judge was basically providing the legal analysis to support or the legal analysis doesn't took them a pest persecution does not depend upon the fear of future prosecute persecution that it really works the other way around right and that would be correct if there is a  focus on the two issues that were raised by opposing counsel the the past persecution and the well founded fear with regard to the past perfect persecution the court has already properly pointed out that these events that mr prakash experienced are not do not amount to the persecution shown in the courts other cases where persecution was found where the court was compelled to that a reasonable fact finder had to find that there was persecution in this case as previously discussed it wasn't event was apparently in one thousand nine hundred four where the petitioner was at a bus stop where he testified in the immigration judge hearing he was at the bus stop some people some ethnic fijians came to him asked him for money and he refused to permitted them to there after harass him there was no evidence at the hearing that the police actively dealt with these people or permitted them to do this there was basically no follow up that this is one isolated incident in the incident and the fact that they asked him for money shows that it was ordinary street crime well that they identify them as india and that seems to have been a part of it has to go back to india right so that seems to me is one of the reasons they picked him as a victim that could be your honor but that would in this circumstance it's such a limited one circumstance limited author cation minor that it would have most amount to discrimination which is very unfortunate but would not amount to a systemic acts of persecution over a long period long detention are more interested in the extensive nest of the event rather than trying to say that that event couldn't have been considered in the mix if there had been other things that we've gone wrong i'm not sure that was guess i'm concerned because there was only one thing and for years before and years after nothing happened to him personally and that's what the government will point out this perhaps is the only occasion where it could have been part of  but all the other acts are not part of that series for instance in the one nine hundred ninety nine two thousand of them where i think fijians came to petition as fathers and they apparently there were some physical altercation there told them to get off the land but i would also point out that in this case in that incident there is no evidence in his testimony that this event was ever even reported to the police or the government these were apparently natives so that i mean persecution a  be by the government or if it's by non government officials the government has to be told and then they don't do anything about it and this incident there's no evidence that the government was told about this and that they didn't do anything about that and then there are a couple of later events in two thousand and two apparently where the petitioners and testified that his parents homes were home was burglarized there is no evidence as to why it was burglarized that it was anything other than ordinary street crime again no evidence as divide entity of these people so that would not be one of those events in a pattern of persecution and that the final event would be the two thousand and three alleged robbery of his father while he was in the why in light of all that evidence conclusion is what it is thank you for your honor for bringing me to that the as the court indicated the immigration judge did spend a long amount of time there with discussion regarding the country port which has been determined by this court to be the most accurate in the country conditions in a country but that but there has to be an individualized consideration of the person's situation and it's not enough to just say oh well bad correct there as well in this case the country report so that according to the immigration judge that and conditions had improved and also based on petitioners circumstances he did not  suffer or if he went back he wouldn't be targeted amongst the other hundreds of thousands of fijians in spits and specific in the pattern and practice cases require require if a petition has gone going to rely on that the petitioner has to show some evidence that he in particular will be singled out when he goes back amongst all the other in hundreds of thousands of india fijians and there is just no evidence that they that the government or ethnic fijians are waiting for petitioner to come back so they can discriminate against him he was in the leader of a political movement or something like that who wraps and correct there was no you know real i haven't he the only evidence we are in politics was that he had voted  apparently but no other connection with regard to religion there was the only evidence was with regard to the bus stop so we're just talking about these few isolated events where only one of them may have met one of the elements so therefore the government would submit that the immigration judge did have substantial evidence to make a finding that the petition it was not entitled to asylum and this court a court would be compelled to find that reasonable fact finder think the government is arguing about nexus i think they're arguing about something more basic than that which is what happened to him once and then well one of the key arguments throughout the briefs and also today is that they're victims of random acts of violence i just want to direct the court to a few pieces of evidence that work nor by the immigration judge that were clearly in the record the most egregious to me is the testimony of the relatives that saw the family dog poisoned foaming at the mouth dying saw the family being ousted from the property she in fact is an asylum in the united states and she arrived here after mr precaution they are the record two or three there's an article says indians lives in fear and it describes events exactly  percussion experienced fiji has traveled back in time thirteen years in the record it to a six to ten is a u s travel warning a current u s travel warning warning us not to travel there because of the civil unrest but mr percussion go back and at two thirty and it talks about the leader of the coup walking free so these are just pieces of evidence that i believe the court should have weighed and had the court looked at these substantial evidence would have what he says he took into consideration i would say he did not weigh he did not weigh anything even within the state department report on which he completely rely he didn't cite any of the any of the problems in fiji that would support the