why aren't you consistent with your I-589?

Ms. L, from Burma, faced these hostile questions from the government lawyer: 1] so, you suffered no physical harm? what was your status in Singapore? you were a "permanent resident" there? so, you do not need asylum here, because you can go and live there? why didn't you apply for citizenship in Singapore? 2] your family lives in peace in Burma? your father has a good job, earns money, and no one bothers him? same for your mother? sister #1? Sister #2? sister #3? brother #1? all of them live in peace? how are you different from them?
3] some things are not mentioned in your I-589? Mr. W helped you fill out the I-589? he spent just 3 hours with you? did you speak good English at the time? you signed it without really understanding it? why do you say you felt coerced into signing it?
4] your passport is very important. PASSPORT! yes, it is full of stamps, however, I, the government lawyer will find the one stamp that shows you are inconsistent! before you came to the USA the last time, when did you get your visa? to get the visa, did you have an interview with officer at the Embassy? you told lies to him? did he ask you about your troubles? did you have a plan at the time of that interview? what was your plan? if you did not have full information about life in the USA, how could you make full and real plans? did you suffer first, and get your visa second? or, get visa first, i.e. you made a plan to come to USA, and then, you claim you suffered harm? isn't that too convenient? the timing of getting your visa is very important: if you got your visa in March, and then claim to have suffered in April, then even though you say you fled your country because of the harm, we believe you were already planning to leave anyway, regardless of any harm.

what is the motive of the bad guys?

Ms. A, from Albania, was denied asylum. She suffered real physical harm: she was raped, and forced to be a prostitute. She suffered emotional distress, and she did not earn money for herself; [i.e. she suffered economic harm]. She had corroboration for her story; in other words, the Judge believed she suffered harm. However, the bad guys had a simple motive: they wanted her body, not her mind. They wanted to earn money off of her. They did not care about her race, her religion, or her political opinion. They just wanted a body to do work.
=

Mr. B, from Brazil, was also denied asylum. He said the bad guys threatened to kill him, so he left his country. He did not suffer any physical harm; nor did he suffer any economic harm. He suffered some emotional distress, [because it is upsetting to receive a death threat], however, he did not have any nightmares or flashbacks. He did not see a psychologist in the USA. The Judge ruled that Mr. B also did not have a fear of harm in the future. The Judge ruled that the bad guys had probably forgotten about him. His wife and two sons continue to live in peace in the country; how come the bad guys did not threaten them? If your family lives in peace, then you can go live with them, and then all of you can live in peace. You do not need asylum, said the Judge.

Falun Gong member from China granted asylum

Mr. C, a member of Falun Gong from China, was asked: 1] tell us about the physical harm you suffered; did a doctor in the USA write a letter for us, verifying that your scars are consistent with being burned with cigarettes and with being cut by a knife?
2] how were you able to leave your country? if your country hates you, why did they let you go?
3] how were you able to re-new your passport, if your country hates you?
4] tell us the name of one Falun Gong member who was harmed in the last six months!