Yes, I read it. I disagree with your conclusions. Bennett did not drop any part of his request and he did get everything he asked for and more.
Yes, the form to request a certified copy of the birth certificate includes the date and place of birth and the parents’ names. (It also includes gender, which you have not mentioned.) That information is required so the HDoH can uniquely identify the birth certificate for which the verification is being requested.
338-14.3 stipulates that the applicant will receive a verification of the existence of a certificate. If Bennett had submitted only that one form, he likely would have received a verification limited to: “A birth certificate is on file with the Department of Health indicating that Barack Hussein Obama, II was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.” And according to section (b) of 338-14.3, that verification would certify the event itself and the facts supplied on the form. 338-14.3 does not require the HDoH to restate the data submitted on the form.
338-14.3 does, however, require the HDoH to specifically verify “any other” information supplied, which they did. So had Bennett specifically included the date and time of birth, parents’ names, and gender with the other 10 items he requested, he likely would have gotten specific verification for those individual items.
Bennett didn’t ask specifically for verification of the name of the delivering physician, but he got a verification for it nonetheless when he asked them to verify that the WH LFBC was a true and accurate representation of the original vital record. Hawaii responded that the information (all of it by implication) matches what is on file in their original. So they verified the name of the delivering physician and everything else on the LFBC.
You’re not digesting what I have said.
In his original request Bennett asked for 3 things - and I clearly said this in the PDF so why am I even repeating it here?
1. From the submitted form: Verification that they have a legally valid BC for Barack Hussein Obama II, and that he was born in Honolulu, HI on Aug 4, 1961 to mother Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and father Barack Hussein Obama... (asking for verification that C (this particular claim) is legally valid/true - a “verification in lieu of a certified copy”)
2. From the special request: Verification that the record they have on file has those 10 (or however many) items he specifically listed. (Verification of what is on B)
3. From the special request: Verification that the BC Obama posted publicly is a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”. (verification that A=B)
The only one of those that is a “verification in lieu of a certified copy” is #1. They never did #1. You keep arguing that #3 is the same as #1. It’s not, because they have never said that EITHER A or B is legally valid. They could be the same and both be as false as the day is long. Even if they HAD said that A was a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file” it STILL wouldn’t verify that either A or B was legally valid/true - but they wouldn’t even go THAT far. So they never did #1.
They did #2, which was just to verify what is on B (the record on file - AGAIN, no verification of whether what’s in the file is legally valid/true).
They never did #3. They verified that the INFORMATION on A matches B. That doesn’t mean that everything on B is also on A, and it doesn’t mean that A is in the same form as B. (As I’ve mentioned, this leaves open the distinct possibility/probability that B has content on it that A doesn’t have - such as LATE and ALTERED stamps and notations of affidavits to support the late and amended filing. And their refusal to answer Bennett’s request as originally asked suggests that they NEEDED to keep that possibility open).
So of Bennett’s original request, only #2 got done. Yet Bennett says he got what he asked for. That means in his final “re-worded” request he never asked for #1 and #3. Based on what Bennett himself said, that has to be the conclusion. That’s logic 101.
Like a proof. Let’s make this a 6th-grade logic question:
1. Bennett originally asked for #1, #2, and #3.
2. Bennett said he had to “re-word” his request.
3. Bennett got #2.
4. Bennett said he got what he asked for.
THEREFORE...... what did Bennett ask for, and how was that different from his original request?