Yes, in the case of the "Precedent's" document this is not true. However, in the context of our previous discussion, the point was made that your mortgage company would only accept PDFs and not JPGs. I offered the above reason as a possible explanation for why this is so. I am surprised that you are aware of vector graphics. Most people are not. (A fact which illustrates one of my other points. Most bureaucrats are unfamiliar with the nuts and bolts of their computer's operation, hence they can send a document to someone while being unaware that it contains the information used to construct it. )
I work for a government agency and it is "illegal" for me to comment on the details of medical calls that I go on if doing so will release protected personal information. However there would be nothing illegal about me discussing the department's policies and procedures.
Mentioning that a specific person (i.e. Barack Obama) may have been adopted is NOT a discussion of policies and procedures. It is a discussion of a specific person's legal and private records. State officials are not permitted to discuss such things because it is a violation of Hawaiian law.
I do not have any problems with you brainstorming and coming up with possible explanations. Nothing would really suprise me in this situation. However, I normally consider someone using large sized all caps and bolded characters in their response... is intended to indicate that they are having some sort of tantrum when others do not agree with them. If this is the case... I am not sure that your passion is helping convince others of the validity of your theory.
You have not had to repeat the same arguments and point out what you believed to be obvious, umpteen zillion times. :)
At this point, I am weary of the discussion and am perfectly willing to let people overlook this possibility, though I think it is a disservice to our efforts to accurately deal with this man.
To me the evidence points to Barack being adopted in 1965 by Lolo Soetoro, and either adopted again or having the previous adoption annulled in 1971 by Grandma Dunham.
If adoptions or annulment occurred, (which the evidence seems to indicate) then it is reasonable to conclude He was given a fake but legal replacement birth certificate at some point in his life. The rest of my theory begins with these premises.
My siblings and I were all adopted at different ages. Although not in Hawaii, each of us has birth certificates that look exactly the same as those of others in the State who were not adopted. The only telltale signs that our BC's are different is the "Hospital" is blank and the issue date on the bottom next to the raised seal is at least a year after the birth. Now, I realize that Obama's would have included the hospital (but his has the incorrect name) and would have been updated after Soetero's adoption but again, it should reflect a date appropriate to the time it takes the court to approve the adoption and if "readopted" by Obama Sr., the same dateline would apply. He would have needed it to go to school in Hawaii, after all.