Do you think this original material (pins, posters,
stickers; printed literature) was a product of our
government to be protected by the HPA? Do you think
"only" those political items mentioned would be
included/considered if such false material other
than what's noted were to be challenged in court
regarding authenticity?

What I meant by saying that I'd rather hear from a
Numismatist Expert(s) as to what is considered
Numismatic in nature, was simply because of the
experience such an expert would have if they had to
be involved in such a case to answer questions
before a judge or court where otherwise others who
may know very little concering past case histories;
results, would be less qualified.

Though "casino chips" may not be exactly expressed
in the language of the HPA, I'm quite sure being
that they are considered tokens would include them.
I wouldn't expect the exact description of anything
to be written into any law or rule...otherwise,
where would it stop? I would think that if a judge
were to ask in a court if a casino chip is
considered numismatic material, most every person he
would ask would answer yes. I would also think that
if that same judge were to ask under what criterion
within the HPA would pinpoint that a casino chip was
numismatic in nature, the first words out of those
who answered wold be "It's a 'token' Judge Judy."
<g>

Sure, the HPA can use a fine-tuning in better
decribing what is considered numismatic in nature,
but I think at least one-thousand pages would be
needed to properly define such tokens, tally tags,
private minted coinage and so on...without even
hitting on chips, plaques, markers, jetons of all
compositions....and I think you get my point.

Let's just be greatful that it was only PAULSON who
was sloppy in their lack of thinkng out whether they
should have produced the FAKE Foxy's Firehouse and
FAKE Cuban chips that they so easilly decided to
destroy when we sent them our friendly notes.

JB