the persecutor attributed a political opinion to the victim, and acted upon the attribution, this imputed view becomes the applicant’s political opinion as required under the [INA].” Id. There is no evidence that suggests the Sendero Luminoso persecuted Cruz on account of an imputed political opinion. Indeed, Cruz fails to link his persecution to anything other than his status as a police officer. During their attack, the guerillas referred to Cruz as a “policeman” and “informer.” Neither of these references implies that the guerillas believed Cruz to hold political beliefs contrary to their own, much less that they attacked him because of such beliefs. While the guerillas may have regarded Cruz as an informant, this is not akin to imputing a political belief to him. See id. at 1489-90 (<HOLDING>). Substantial evidence therefore supports the
holding that applicant failed to establish imputed political opinion where he presented no evidence that an antigovernmental guerilla group imputed his fathers political beliefs to him holding that imputed political opinion is a protected ground holding that attempted conscription by a guatemalan guerrilla group did not constitute persecution on account of a political opinion where petitioner failed to show that the group was motivated by his political opinion holding that persecutors statements indicating that they had chosen her because of her fathers relationship to the philippine government constituted persecution on account of an imputed political opinion holding that fathers military service alone was neither political opinion nor sufficient to establish imputed political opinion