#property in New Zealand

[explanationpoint]

.

[anarchistin]

We don't live in a game of monopoly, which by the way, was invented in the early 1900s to actually teach children about the pitfalls of an economy that is premises on land speculation and luck.

— New Zealand MP Chlöe Swarbrick

[hetagrammy]

I know you haven’t talked about it in a bit but I’m the regency au will the fact that Arthur’s children can’t inherit ever be a thing that causes resentment from the kids? (Far in the future of course)

Hi, so the biggest reason I haven't talked about it in a while is that uni is kicking my ass lol. That's why I haven't posted art in a hot minute, let alone any writing. When I'm out of paper hell and on break, I'll hopefully be back at it! I actually wanted to draw some of the kids circa the 1820s when they're older for shits and giggles.

So here's the thing about Regency inheritance, his kids do get something! So, the estate itself and the title the Kirklands hold is entailed. An entail means that only the oldest, closest, legitimate male family member can inherit that title and estate. If you've ever read Pride and Prejudice or seen Downton Abbey, this is why Mr. Collins and Matthew Crawley are relevant. This just means that Alfred will not inherit Alwyn's title and the land.

However, money and non-entailed property is a different story. The land that came from Alasdair, Seán, and Molly's father is not entailed, it was simply property Alwyn and Arthur's father took on when Igraine remarried. It was also common in cases where illegitimate children were acknowledged for their father to put aside money in a trust for their children.

In the case of the Regency AU, Arthur and Alwyn have arranged a trust for each of his children (and a dowry for Eleanor that is ultimately never used). When he's older, Alfred cares less about getting a title and more about being trusted with some responsibility. I'm undecided about whether he'd follow Arthur into the military or if he'd seek employment elsewhere (leaning toward the latter as his little "rebellion"). Matthew is a lot more passive, and I think he's content knowing he's not going to be left out to dry. Similarly, Ralph just wants the freedom to be himself. They're both younger sons anyway, so they never had any of the expectations Alfred might've had. Similarly, Eleanor would not have been up to inherit land anyway, as the youngest and as a woman. She at least has the fortune of having a father who isn't keen on forcing her to marry.

Long story short, while I can see Alfred developing some resentment regarding the lack of trust Arthur puts in him, the inheritance isn't necessarily an issue. They're provided for, they just don't get that title or the estate.

[andromedasummer]

hey if u live in christchurch or ashburton or rolleston or geraldine or anywhere in the area i love u okay take a breath

[dontwanderoff]

does the australian taskmaster house and grounds look suspiciously similar to the new zealand taskmaster house and grounds to anyone else????

[colosiggold]

[linma-wigram]

Looking to buy residential property in the stunning landscapes of New Zealand? Count on Lin Ma - Award-Winning Harcourts Grenadier Sales Consultant – to discover your dream home.

[canterburyappraisal]

Property valuation is the process of estimating the value of a property based on a variety of factors. Property valuation is important for a number of reasons, including buying and selling property, obtaining financing, and assessing property tax.

In this guide, we will provide a complete overview of property valuation, including the methods used, factors considered, and the role of a property valuer.

[provinciaaa]

5 Proven Reasons To Invest Your Capital In Industrial Property

Have you accumulated the capital but are unsure whether to invest in Real Estate? Over the past few years, the demand for investing in property has hiked so much. This sector is gaining attention through its reasons such as higher returns. Industrial property is attracting investors and heading them to connect with Best property investment company to get the appropriate investment options.

When we compare the industrial property with commercial one, it offers higher income yields and growth opportunities. As we always wish for a sound investment option that generates a stable income and higher ROI, investing in an industrial property can make you happy for several reasons. 

 Here we have spotlighted 5 proven reasons to invest in industrial property. 

Variety of Options

Industrial Sector is a huge prospect. It’s like the gold mine, the more you dig in the better option you get. There is countless potential business to invest in. For instance, if the demand for the manufacturing industry is higher, you can earn a prominent ROI there. Additionally, it has the flexibility to make better use of your investment and switch the leasing to a higher-earning revenue business. 

Demand Touching Heights

Calls to a property investment company have increased due to the high rise in demand for industrial properties. As we have administered many businesses have constantly progressed, for example, the e-commerce sector. This sector requires large-scale properties to fulfil their logistics purpose of the manufacturing process and so on. Hence, investing in industrial property becomes the reason for a brighter future. 

Terrific Rental Earnings

Everyone sees profit and earnings because it is the factor that matters the most. While investing in industrial property, you can achieve promising rental yields. It offers you a flourishing 5% to 10 % of returns where as you will only get 1% or 2 % in residential investment. With the increasing demand for working space, the demand for long-term leases has also increased. This can serve the ultimate happiness of higher returns. 

Hassle-Free Maintenance 

An industrial property tenant can be at peace of mind because it requires fewer maintenance costs. For an instance, if you invest in commercial property there will be a long list of spending such as renovations and repairs. Whereas, there will be small overheads as a wide open space doesn’t require the whole renovation thing. So, you can rest assured in terms of additional expenses. 

Smooth Termination

Last but not least,  You can easily turn off the investment. Sometimes industrial business tends to continue for a shorter period, you can easily sell your property whenever you need. Here short-term leasing can be beneficial, you can jump to other bigger opportunities.  You can access the cash in your hand quickly at the time of liquidation. 

 

Turning Off!

There is no doubt that investing in an industrial property will surely open the doors to success. By witnessing the aforementioned reasons, you should head towards the property investment company and grab the best opportunity for industrial investment to earn yields to a great extent. 

Source by :- 5 Proven Reasons To Invest Your Capital In Industrial Property

[scopeworks]

Best Winter House Cleaning Tips

If you want deep clean your home in the winter, we will talk about some astounding winter housekeeping tips that will help you.

[reportwire]

A Rather Grand Bit Of The Shire Lists In New Zealand’s Wairarapa District

A Rather Grand Bit Of The Shire Lists In New Zealand’s Wairarapa District

After 15 years, one of New Zealand’s most significant properties has been priced for market at $5.2 million―the grand estate’s otherworldly gardens blushed with myth. Its substantial lake was the set piece for a doomed hobbit who found a golden ring buried on its murky bottom for two and half millennia. New Zealand film director Peter Jackson, in fact, lives a half-hour drive north of the…

[doyoulikethissong-poll]

Michael Jackson - Will You Be There 1993

"Will You Be There" is the eighth single from Michael Jackson's 1991 album Dangerous. The song gained recognition for its appearance on the soundtrack to the 1993 film Free Willy, of which it is the main theme, and was also included in the album All Time Greatest Movie Songs and video game Michael Jackson: The Experience. "Will You Be There" became yet another successful single from Dangerous, and peaked within the top ten of the charts in USA, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Ireland, Switzerland, and the UK. It won the 1994 MTV Movie Award for Best Song from a Movie. Jackson revealed in Living with Michael Jackson that "Will You Be There" was one of several songs he wrote in addition to "Heal the World" while at the Giving Tree, located on his Neverland Ranch property. It received 40,6% total yes votes. :'(

[ranmagender]

Public Domain Day 2023

Happy Public Domain Day everyone. This year some stuff became public domain so like the last few years imma list some of the notable things.

These are works that are entering the public domain in 2023 and therefore can be used by anyone in any way as their copyright is expiring. If a work is listed here know it applies to the creators entire body of work (except in the USA)

In Europe and other life of author + 70 years areas:

Maya the Bee by Waldemar Bonsels

Goodnight Moon by Margaret Wise Brown

The Underdogs by Mariano Azuela

The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tay

Caspar Milquetoast comic strips by H. T. Webster

The Museum of Eterna's Novel by Macedonio Fernández

In Japan & New Zealand and other life of author + 50 years areas:

The works of Nobel laureate Yasunari Kawabata

In the USA (works made before 1975 have a 95 year long copyright)

All media published in 1927. Some notable among these are...

The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, Alfred Hitchcock's first thriller.

The Jazz Singer, the first sound film

The original three stories of the Hardy Boys

The last Allan Quatermain book, Allan and the Ice Gods

The last two Sherlock Holmes stories (now sherlock holmes is public domain worldwide with no strings, suck it Arthur Conan Doyle estate)

Everywhere

In September 2023, comic book writer Bill Willingham intentionally released the Fables intellectual property into the public domain

There's of course more but these are just some of the highlights, go forth and explore. You can find a lot of this on Archive.org or Gutenberg.org

[crystalis]

twitter thread by Mouin Rabbani

March 14, 2024

Who was there first? The short answer is that the question is irrelevant. Claims of ancient title (“This land is ours because we were here several thousand years ago”) have no standing or validity under international law.

For good reason, because such claims also defy elementary common sense. Neither I nor anyone reading this post can convincingly substantiate the geographical location of their direct ancestors ten or five or even two thousand years ago.

If we could, the successful completion of the exercise would confer exactly zero property, territorial, or sovereign rights.

As a thought experiment, let’s go back only a few centuries rather than multiple millennia. Do South Africa’s Afrikaners have the right to claim The Netherlands as their homeland, or even qualify for Dutch citizenship, on the basis of their lineage?

Do the descendants of African-Americans who were forcibly removed from West Africa have the right to board a flight in Atlanta, Port-au-Prince, or São Paolo and reclaim their ancestral villages from the current inhabitants, who in all probability arrived only after – perhaps long after – the previous inhabitants were abducted and sold into slavery half a world away?

Do Australians who can trace their roots to convicts who were involuntarily transported Down Under by the British government have a right to return to Britain or Ireland and repossess homes from the present inhabitants even if, with the help of court records, they can identify the exact address inhabited by their forebears? Of course not.

In sharp contrast to, for example, Native Americans or the Maori of New Zealand, none of the above can demonstrate a living connection with the lands to which they would lay claim.

To put it crudely, neither nostalgic attachment nor ancestry, in and of themselves, confer rights of any sort, particularly where such rights have not been asserted over the course of hundreds or thousands of years.

If they did, American English would be the predominant language in large parts of Europe, and Spain would once again be speaking Arabic.

Nevertheless, the claim of ancient title has been and remains central to Zionist assertions of not only Jewish rights in Palestine, but of an exclusive Jewish right to Palestine.

For the sake of argument, let’s examine it. If we put aside religious mythology, the origin of the ancient Israelites is indeed local.

In ancient times it was not unusual for those in conflict with authority or marginalized by it to take to the more secure environment of surrounding hills or mountains, conquer existing settlements or establish new ones, and in the ultimate sign of independence adopt distinct religious practices and generate their own rulers. That the Israelites originated as indigenous Canaanite tribes rather than as fully-fledged monotheistic immigrants or conquerors is more or less the scholarly consensus, buttressed by archeological and other evidence. And buttressed by the absence of evidence for the origin stories more familiar to us.

It is also the scholarly consensus that the Israelites established two kingdoms, Judah and Israel, the former landlocked and covering Jerusalem and regions to the south, the latter (also known as the Northern Kingdom or Samaria) encompassing points north, the Galilee, and parts of contemporary Jordan. Whether these entities were preceded by a United Kingdom that subsequently fractured remains the subject of fierce debate.

What is certain is that the ancient Israelites were never a significant regional power, let alone the superpower of the modern imagination.

There is a reason the great empires of the Middle East emerged in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, and Anatolia – or from outside the region altogether – but never in Palestine.

It simply lacked the population and resource base for power projection. Jerusalem may be the holiest of cities on earth, but for almost the entirety of its existence, including the period in question, it existed as a village, provincial town or small city rather than metropolis.

Judah and Israel, like the neighboring Canaanite and Philistine entities during this period, were for most of their existence vassal states, their fealty and tribute fought over by rival empires – Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, etc. – rather than extracted from others.

Indeed, Israel was destroyed during the eighth century BCE by the Assyrians, who for good measured subordinated Judah to their authority, until it was in the sixth century BCE eliminated by the Babylonians, who had earlier overtaken the Assyrians in a regional power struggle.

The Babylonian Exile was not a wholesale deportation, but rather affected primarily Judah’s elites and their kin. Nor was there a collective return to the homeland when the opportunity arose several decades later after Cyrus the Great defeated Babylon and re-established a smaller Judah as a province of the Persian Achaemenid empire. Indeed, Mesopotamia would remain a key center of Jewish religion and culture for centuries afterwards.

Zionist claims of ancient title conveniently erase the reality that the ancient Israelites were hardly the only inhabitants of ancient Palestine, but rather shared it with Canaanites, Philistines, and others.

The second part of the claim, that the Jewish population was forcibly expelled by the Romans and has for 2,000 years been consumed with the desire to return, is equally problematic.

By the time the Romans conquered Jerusalem during the first century BCE, established Jewish communities were already to be found throughout the Mediterranean world and Middle East – to the extent that a number of scholars have concluded that a majority of Jews already lived in the diaspora by the time the first Roman soldier set foot in Jerusalem.

These communities held a deep attachment to Jerusalem, its Temple, and the lands recounted in the Bible. They identified as diasporic communities, and in many cases may additionally have been able to trace their origins to this or that town or village in the extinguished kingdoms of Israel and Judah. But there is no indication those born and bred in the diaspora across multiple generations considered themselves to be living in temporary exile or considered the territory of the former Israelite kingdoms rather than their lands of birth and residence their natural homeland, any more than Irish-Americans today feel they properly belong in Ireland rather than the United States.

Unlike those taken in captivity to Babylon centuries earlier, there was no impediment to their relocation to or from their ancestral lands, although economic factors appear to have played an important role in the growth of the diaspora.

By contrast, those traveling in the opposite direction appear to have done so, more often than not, for religious reasons, or to be buried in Jerusalem’s sacred soil.

Nations and nationalism did not exist 2,000 years ago.

Nor Zionist propagandists in New York, Paris, and London incessantly proclaiming that for two millennia Jews everywhere have wanted nothing more than to return their homeland, and invariably driving home rather than taking the next flight to Tel Aviv.

Nor insufferably loud Americans declaring, without a hint of irony or self-awareness, the right of the Jewish people to Palestine “because they were there first”.

Back to the Romans, about a century after their arrival a series of Jewish rebellions over the course of several decades, coupled with internecine warfare between various Jewish factions, produced devastating results.

A large proportion of the Jewish population was killed in battle, massacred, sold into slavery, or exiled. Many towns and villages were ransacked, the Temple in Jerusalem destroyed, and Jews barred from entering the city for all but one day a year.

Although a significant Jewish presence remained, primarily in the Galilee, the killings, associated deaths from disease and destitution, and expulsions during the Roman-Jewish wars exacted a calamitous toll.

With the destruction of the Temple Jerusalem became an increasingly spiritual rather than physical center of Jewish life. Jews neither formed a demographic majority in Palestine, nor were the majority of Jews to be found there.

Many of those who remained would in subsequent centuries convert to Christianity or Islam, succumb to massacres during the Crusades, or join the diaspora. On the eve of Zionist colonization locally-born Jews constituted less than five per cent of the total population.

As for the burning desire to return to Zion, there is precious little evidence to substantiate it. There is, for example, no evidence that upon their expulsion from Spain during the late fifteenth century, the Sephardic Jewish community, many of whom were given refuge by the Ottoman Empire that ruled Palestine, made concerted efforts to head for Jerusalem. Rather, most opted for Istanbul and Greece.

Similarly, during the massive migration of Jews fleeing persecution and poverty in Eastern Europe during the nineteenth century, the destinations of choice were the United States and United Kingdom.

Even after the Zionist movement began a concerted campaign to encourage Jewish emigration to Palestine, less than five per cent took up the offer. And while the British are to this day condemned for limiting Jewish immigration to Palestine during the late 1930s, the more pertinent reality is that the vast majority of those fleeing the Nazi menace once again preferred to relocate to the US and UK, but were deprived of these havens because Washington and London firmly slammed their doors shut.

Tellingly, the Jewish Agency for Israel in 2023 reported that of the world’s 15.7 million Jews, 7.2 million – less than half – reside in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.

According to the Agency, “The Jewish population numbers refer to persons who define themselves as Jews by religion or otherwise and who do not practice another religion”.

It further notes that if instead of religion one were to apply Israel’s Law of Return, under which any individual with one or more Jewish grandparent is entitled to Israeli citizenship, only 7.2 of 25.5 million eligible individuals (28 per cent) have opted for Zion.

In other words, “Next Year in Jerusalem” was, and largely remains, an aspirational religious incantation rather than political program. For religious Jews, furthermore, it was to result from divine rather than human intervention.

For this reason, many equated Zionism with blasphemy, and until quite recently most Orthodox Jews were either non-Zionist or rejected the ideology altogether.

Returning to the irrelevant issue of ancestry, if there is one population group that can lay a viable claim of direct descent from the ancient Israelites it would be the Samaritans, who have inhabited the area around Mount Gerizim, near the West Bank city of Nablus, without interruption since ancient times.

Palestinian Jews would be next in line, although unlike the Samaritans they interacted more regularly with both other Jewish communities and their gentile neighbors.

Claims of Israelite descent made on behalf of Jewish diaspora communities are much more difficult to sustain. Conversions to and from Judaism, intermarriage with gentiles, absorption in multiple foreign societies, and related phenomena over the course of several thousand years make it a virtual certainty that the vast majority of Jews who arrived in Palestine during the late 19th and first half of the 20th century to reclaim their ancient homeland were in fact the first of their lineage to ever set foot in it.

By way of an admittedly imperfect analogy, most Levantines, Egyptians, Sudanese, and North Africans identify as Arabs, yet the percentage of those who can trace their roots to the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula that conquered their lands during the seventh and eighth centuries is at best rather small.

Ironically, a contemporary Palestinian, particularly in the West Bank and Galilee, is likely to have more Israelite ancestry than a contemporary diaspora Jew.

The Palestinians take their name from the Philistines, one of the so-called Sea Peoples who arrived on the southern coast of Canaan from the Aegean islands, probably Crete, during the late second millennium BCE.

They formed a number of city states, including Gaza, Ashdod, and Ashkelon. Like Judah and Israel they existed primarily as vassals of regional powers, and like them were eventually destroyed by more powerful states as well.

With no record of their extermination or expulsion, the Philistines are presumed to have been absorbed by the Canaanites and thereafter disappear from the historical record.

Sitting at the crossroads between Asia, Africa, and Europe, Palestine was over the centuries repeatedly conquered by empires near and far, absorbing a constant flow of human and cultural influences throughout.

Given its religious significance, pilgrims from around the globe also contributed to making the Palestinian people what they are today.

A common myth is that the Palestinian origin story dates from the Arab-Muslim conquests of the seventh century. In point of fact, the Arabs neither exterminated nor expelled the existing population, and the new rulers never formed a majority of the population.

Rather, and over the course of several centuries, the local population was gradually Arabized, and to a large extent Islamized as well.

So the question as to who was there first can be answered in several ways: “both” and “irrelevant” are equally correct.

Indisputably, the Zionist movement had no right to establish a sovereign state in Palestine on the basis of claims of ancient title, which was and remains its primary justification for doing so.

That it established an exclusivist state that not only rejected any rights for the existing Palestinian population but was from the very outset determined to displace and replace this population was and remains a historical travesty.

That it as a matter of legislation confers automatic citizenship on millions who have no existing connection with the land but denies it to those who were born there and expelled from it, solely on the basis of their identity, would appear to be the very definition of apartheid.

The above notwithstanding, and while the Zionist claim of exclusive Israeli sovereignty in Palestine remains illegitimate, there are today several million Israelis who cannot be simply wished away.

A path to co-existence will need to be found, even as the genocidal nature of the Israeli state, and increasingly of Israeli society as well, makes the endeavor increasingly complicated.

The question, thrown into sharp relief by Israel’s genocidal onslaught on the Palestinian population of the Gaza Strip, is whether co-existence with Israeli society can be achieved without first dismantling the Israeli state and its ruling institutions.

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

…the colossal screw up of Archie's birth announcement

I was not following the royals back then, so I am completely out of the loop with what was happening when Archie was born. There’s so much noise and theories littering this space, that it’s hard to delineate what is actually the screw up and where the theories start and how far plausible goes before it turns into crazy. Do you have a record or write-up you can point me to?

Totally okay if you want to just ignore this ask, though. I know this topic invites unhelpful inputs from people.

Hey, everyone, it's Wednesday! Guess what that means...yup, a super long research project to the dulcet sounds of Top Chef.

I think I'll just give you the whole timeline and then some since there's a lot of debate and discussion around both things.

The Pregnancy

October 12, 2018: Princess Eugenie marries Jack Brooksbanks. Meghan wears a dark navy dress and coat. Only the top buttons of her coat are done, causing immediate speculation that she's expecting.

October 15, 2018: Kensington Palace announces that Harry and Meghan are expecting and the baby is due in the springtime. The royal rota is informed by Jason Knauf over a cell phone in the airport, as they were already in Australia to begin coverage of the Sussexes' tour.

Now, usually when the palace makes these kind of announcements, there's a separate briefing for the royal rota with a few additional details for them to write about. In Rebecca English's article about the pregnancy announcement, she reveals that Meghan had had her 12-week scan, the baby is due in late April 2019, and that they were telling everyone at Eugenie's wedding. The article also reveals that Meghan will visit Tonga and Fiji despite the Zika risk (pregnant women are advised not to travel to areas with the Zika virus due to the risk Zika poses to their baby); it's a controversial decision.

October 15, 2018: Harry and Meghan are papped arriving in Sydney, leaving the airport. Meghan is holding two purple binders, leading to speculation that they are expecting boy-girl twins.

Pippa Middleton gives birth to her first child on October 15th (though it isn't announced for a bit), stealing some of the Sussexes' coverage.

October 15 - 31, 2018: Harry and Meghan are in Australia for the Sydney Invictus Games. They also tour New Zealand, Tonga, and Fiji. There is a ton of gossip and tea about the tour. Meghan is also photographed with a very inconsistent baby belly - sometimes it's there, sometimes it's not.

Also during this time (and into November) is the Sussex press tsunami when these stories were breaking:

"What Meghan wants, Meghan gets"

Meghan smells tastes eggs that aren't there

Meghan made Kate cry

Sussexes are moving out of Kensington Palace

The Sussexes' office is moving to Buckingham Palace; they'll be part of the resource pool that also represents Anne, Yorkies, Edward, Sophie, Kents, and Gloucesters.

Sussexes are leaving The Royal Foundation and setting up The SussexRoyal Foundation.

November 24, 2018: The palace announces that Harry and Meghan are moving to Frogmore Cottage. They will renovate the property from five staff apartments to ten bedrooms, a nursery, a gym, and a yoga studio.

December 18, 2018: Meghan makes a surprise appearance at the British Fashion Awards to recognize Clare Waight Keller (her wedding dress designer) as the British Womenswear Designer of the Year. Allegedly she crashed the event unexpectedly. She is photographed groping her belly the whole time while on stage presenting.

December 25, 2018: During the Christmas walkabout after church, Meghan tells fans that she is "nearly there". It causes confusion because the palace had briefed reporters two months earlier that it was an April baby.

**Anon, this Christmas walk where Meghan says "nearly there" re the baby's due date is where it starts veering off the rails.**

January 14, 2019: Meghan, with Harry, visits Birkenhead for an away day. At the end of the visit when they are leaving, Meghan is observed by some to have lost her belly while developing a new bulge around her mid/lower thighs. (YMMV.)

January 16, 2019: Meghan visits the Mayhew Animal House during the day, in which some people claim to observe her belly folding in and then popping out and others claim to hear a loud popping noise when she stands up. (YMMV.) Later, in the evening, she attends a Cirque du Soleil performance at Royal Albert Hall. This is the night that, as she tells Oprah in March 2021, she felt suicidal and had been crying all day up until just before arriving at the Hall.

February 15 - 20, 2019: Meghan is in New York City to attend a baby shower thrown in her honor by Serena Williams. She stays at the Mark Hotel. Abigail Spencer merches Away luggage. Jess Mulroney and Amal Clooney are some of the guests. Markus Anderson unexpectedly shows up and allegedly, Meghan is upset to see him. There's a ton of paparazzi, which Meghan loves, and the Mark Hotel ropes off the sidewalk for her, which she also loves.

There is a CDAN blind about the baby shower, alleging that Meghan had asked (maybe demanded) the BRF for one but they refused because it's not what they do.

The baby shower causes a lot of questions. There's one instance where Meghan returns from a night out holding a large purse over her stomach area, which is unusual because in every photo since October, Meghan is always showing off her belly.

Meghan leaves NYC by a private jet via Teterboro Airport, assumed to be Amal Clooney's private jet.

This is the end of the Meghan/Amal friendship, as on March 15, 2019, Clarence House announces a partnership between Prince Charles and Amal Clooney establishing the Amal Clooney Award from Prince's Trust International.

February 23 - 25, 2019: Harry and Meghan are in Morocco for an official visit by request of the Foreign Office.

There's speculation that Meghan was planning to attend the Oscars (which are held on February 24, 2019) and allegedly, the BRF caught wind of it and created the Morocco tour to keep her focused on royal work.

Edited to add: After checking my spreadsheet, I realized I missed one - related to speculation/gossip about Meghan attending the Oscars, there’s additional speculation that the BRF planned the Morocco trip to force Meghan to come home from NYC. (I kind of suspect this may be the origin of “they took my passport” claims as told to Oprah because supposedly the palace was upset she had the baby shower and upset she’d gone out of the country to do so.)

March 5, 2019: When Harry and Meghan crash Charles's celebration of the 50th anniversary of his Prince of Wales investiture, Meghan tells people she is "nearly there" still, according to Us Weekly. Us Weekly also reports that a Sussex source had briefed them that the baby was due in the late March/early April timeframe.

March 14, 2019: Commonwealth Day Service. Kensington Palace indirectly confirms that this is Meghan's last appearance before the baby arrives and she is beginning maternity leave.

March 19, 2019: Meghan suspends her maternity leave to visit the New Zealand embassy with Harry to lay flowers in a tribute to victims of a mosque shooting. Meghan, who is photographed cradling her belly, is also photographed squatting down with knees and feet together, causing questions as some observe that it looks like her belly has completely disappeared.

April 2, 2019: Meghan, with Harry, is papped visiting an apothecary shop.

April 4, 2019: Harry and Meghan are confirmed to have moved into Frogmore Cottage.

The Birth

Note: All items italicized and in red are timings we learned after the fact. Items in "regular" font (not italicized and black) is the timing that happened live on May 6.

May 5, 2019, late in the evening: Meghan and Doria are driven to the Portland Hospital.

May 6, 2019, 5:26am GMT: Meghan gives birth after two epidurals According to Harry in Spare, it was a traumatic birth, potentially complicated, but an emergency c-section was not discussed with Meghan as Harry declined to tell her what was going on. Also, Harry gets high on laughing gas and the nurse disapprove.

May 6, 2019, 7:26am GMT: Harry, Meghan, and Baby Boy Sussex are home from the hospital (from Spare).

May 6, 2019, 1:30pm GMT: Sky News is selected as the pool broadcaster for the birth announcement when a Sussex spokesperson (probably Sara Latham) reaches out to Sky News to coordinate coverage for a statement Harry will make soon.

May 6, 2019, 1:50pm GMT: The palace announces Meghan has gone into labor and is at the hospital. Sky News has the exclusive story owing to the earlier conversation with Sussex representatives.

May 6, 2019, 2:15pm GMT: Harry records his statement about the baby's birth from a stable in Windsor. He speaks about the baby being born early in the morning. Horses make an appearance.

May 6, 2019, 2:37pm GMT: Harry and Meghan announce the birth of Baby Boy Sussex. The palace follows up with more details, including that the baby was born at 5:26am.

The palace's announcement raises questions, as the language used to describe the birth is different from the language used on all the other royal birth announcements.

The traditional birth announcement: {Title} has been safely delivered of a {son or daughter} at {time} today. Her Royal Highness and her child are both doing well. {signatures of medical staff} {date}

This language has been used for the Cambridges (George, Charlotte, and Louis), the Waleses (William and Harry), the Yorks (Beatrice and Eugenie), the Phillipses (Peter and Zara), the Edinburghs (Charles, Anne, Andrew, and Edward), the Brooksbanks (August and Ernie), and the Wessexes (Louise and James).

The Sussexes' birth announcement: The Queen and the Royal Family are delighted at the news that Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex was safely delivered of a son at 0526am today. Her Royal Highness and her child are both doing well. 06 May, 2019.

Immediately causing questions was the verb choice "was" (versus "has been"). From a grammar perspective, "was" is used to describe something that had already happened at a specific point in the past. "Has been" is a verb tense used to talk about an ongoing event - something that started in the past but is still happening. Looking at the language in the birth announcements, and examining it through the grammar only:

When George's birth was announced, Kate was still in the birthing process but it was a safe delivery. Which makes sense; birth doesn't end when the baby pops out - there's afterbirth, there's the hormone evacuation (for lack of a better word), there's the organs moving back into place, etc. She's still in the hospital receving care.

When Archie's birth was announced, Meghan had already completed giving birth. She was no longer in the hospital, already at home.

Causing even bigger questions was the missing medical staff.

Reporters immediately begin asking questions about the timing of the announcements, where the baby was born, who delivered the baby, and why everyone was told she was in labor when she had already given birth.

May 6, 2019, 2:40pm GMT: Harry's pre-recorded statement with Sky News is broadcast. When he begins speaking, the chyron says "Meghan is in labor." After he announces the baby's birth "early this morning," the chyron changes to "Meghan has given birth."

May 7, 2019, 12:28pm GMT: Palace officials apologize for the bungled birth announcement but there are no explanations or clarifications made.

May 8, 2019: Harry and Meghan announce the baby's name, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. They have a photocall with the baby in St. George's Hall, Windsor Castle, in which Harry says the infamous quote "babies change so much in two weeks." Later, they take photos with The Queen, Prince Philip, and Doria.

The photocall and the photos aren't without controversy. Royal-watchers and Windsor locals pinpoint two: May 8th is actually a very wet and overcast day in Windsor, so how did they get sunlight streaming in through the windows? And second (admittedly this one I don't understand), there's a question about either The Queen's clothes or the timing of the photo - she's supposed to be at the Royal Windsor Horse Show? Something to do with horses? - that people are confused by.

May 9, 2024: Harry goes to The Hague for Invictus Games 2020 kickoff events. (It has echoes of Charles leaving Diana just hours after Harry is born to go play polo.)

Afterwards

May 12, 2019: Mother's Day in the US. The Sussexes post a picture of Meghan holding Archie's feet in a field of forget-me-nots.

May 17, 2019: Archie's birth certificate is released. Harry doesn't have the right title.

June 6, 2019: Archie's birth certificate is updated to correct Harry's title and change Meghan's name from Rachel Meghan Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex to Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex.

June 8, 2019: Trooping the Colors. Meghan pauses her maternity leave to attend. She and Harry ride in a carriage with Kate and Camilla. Six things happen that everyone notices:

Meghan stares down Kate many times throughout the carriage procession.

When the royals are coming out onto the balcony for the flypast, Kate - carrying Louis (in his balcony debut) - walks out towards the right side of the balcony, by Andrew, while William veers to the left. William calls to Kate and she turns to join him, George, and Charlotte on the left side of the balcony. Harry and Meghan later come out on the right side, near to where the Cambridges would have been.

The Queen comes out onto the balcony and Meghan sees an opening to move in next to her, but then Andrew suddenly moves in, blocking Meghan. Anne moves in next to Andrew behind The Queen, effectively blocking the Sussexes from moving in.

When Meghan turns to speak to Harry, he sternly tells her to turn around. This happens twice. The second time, Meghan does an awkward shuffle to turn around and she starts rapidly blinking her eyes and clenching her jaw.

When The Queen is leaving the balcony after the flypast, Harry and Meghan bow/curtsy, suggesting that they were late arriving to Buckingham Palace before the parade to have properly greeted The Queen.

Meghan tries to speak to George as he passes by and he throws up a 'talk to the hand'-esque wave at her.

Allegedly, Harry and Meghan were set to have their own carriage at Trooping (as they did in 2019) but the BRF had concerns they would be booed and were thrown in with Kate and Camilla at the last minute. Allegedly, Harry didn't like this because he knew it was a demotion to go from their own carriage to riding backwards in someone else's carriage; when there's a group riding together, protocol requires the senior royals to face forward with junior royals facing backwards.

Also Meghan talks to herself.

I can't find a good video of the balcony so if anyone has one, please share!

June 17, 2019: Father's Day. The Sussexes post a new photo of Harry holding baby Archie. Harry is flipping everyone off and Archie's face is partially obscured.

June 27, 2019: SussexRoyal Instagram announces that the Sussexes will travel to South Africa in autumn. They indirectly announce that Archie will join them.

July 6, 2019: Archie's christening at Windsor Castle. Harry and Meghan decline to announce who his godparents are, citing privacy. The portraits are the first time we see Archie's face in full. They raise questions. Some people observe that the perspective/scale of William and Kate is off from the rest of the group. Others observe that Kate's chair is missing a leg. Others observe that the reflections behind the Spencer sisters and Doria are off.

Ahead of the christening service, William and Kate are papped driving into Windsor Castle. In the pap photo, both are wearing blue; Kate a blue dress or sweater and William a light blue casual shirt but in the released portraits, William is wearing a starched white shirt and Kate a pink outfit. There's some discussion that they changed at Windsor before the service but there's also something wonky going on with the metadata in the photos.

July 10, 2019: William and Harry play polo for charity. Kate, the kids, and Meghan attend. Meghan brings Archie. The lack of interaction between Kate and Meghan gets noticed quickly, as does Meghan seeming not to know what to do with Archie: she holds him for the whole outing, he seems poorly dressed (no hat or sun covering), and he doesn't move/Meghan doesn't change his position.

Allegedly, Meghan wasn't supposed to go to the polo match. Supposedly she had heard that Chelsy was there and hightailed it over with Archie to keep her man in line. (Yuck, I felt gross just writing that.)

July 14, 2019: Meghan breaks maternity leave again to attend the European premiere of The Lion King: Live-Action edition in London with Harry, who cancelled an event with the Royal Marines for this. Harry is caught on a hot mike pitching Bob Isner (Disney's CEO) about Meghan doing a voiceover.

July 26, 2019: According to The Sun, Harry and Meghan's neighbors in Windsor have been sent rules for interacting with the royals that include don't approaching the couple, speak only when spoken to, don't pet the dogs, and don't ask about the baby. Buckingham Palace denies that Harry and Meghan knew this was happening.

July 28, 2019: Meghan breaks her maternity leave again to guest-edit British Vogue's September 2019 edition, Forces for Change. There's controversy:

Allegedly Meghan was asked by the BRF if she was doing this and she kept telling them no.

Harry interviewed Jane Goodall for the edition, in which he made a comment that he and Meghan were only having two children for the environment. (The Sussexes eventually get some kind of award for this.)

Meghan interviews Michelle Obama over a lunch of fish tacos. It turns out that the interview was conducted over email.

Accusations of plagiarism, as an Australian magazine already did this something like this with a very similar front cover layout.

Also, just because: Inside Meghan Markle's disastrous attempt to edit Vogue magazine - new book 'Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors.'

And throughout July and August, Harry and Meghan are getting flack for racking up private air miles despite being environmentalists. They do four back-to-back private flights across Europe with Archie. On one of these trips, they meet David Sherborne, Elton John's lawyer and off to the lawsuit races we go.

The Queen invites them to Balmoral to join the family but the Sussexes decline, allegedly because Archie was too young to fly. (Mm-hmm, and then they take him on four flights to Europe.)

September 6, 2019: The Sussexes' itinerary for their Africa tour is released. As part of the tour, Harry will visit Angola and copy Diana's famous de-mining walk.

September 12, 2019: Meghan's maternity leave ends with an announcement introducing Smart Set, a capsule collection from her friends that benefit Smart Works. Meghan gives a speech that ends awkwardly when she says she needs to leave because it's "feed time."

September 23 - October 2, 2019: Harry, Meghan, and Archie travel to South Africa, Malawi, Angola, and Botswana. Meghan tries to merch Archie's clothes from H&M but it gets shut down pretty quickly. Archie's first official engagement is to meet Archbishop Desmond Tutu, which SussexRoyal cringely calls 'Arch, meet Arch.' Meghan gives her infamous "no one asked me if I'm okay" interview in which she discusses her post-partum challenges as a "young mom" and her mental health distress. Harry gets in a tiff with one of the royal reporters, snapping at her "you know what you did" when she tries to ask a clarifying question.

Princess Beatrice announces her engagement on September 26th and it steals some of the Sussexes' coverage.

And after the tour (or on the last day of the tour? I don't remember and it's late), Harry announces that he's suing the British press and it is chaos.

November 7, 2019: Harry and Meghan attend the opening of the Field of Remembrance ceremony at Westminster Abbey. Camilla was supposed to join, but backed out at the last minute citing a cold. When Meghan is pictured in overly glamorous hair and makeup for the event, speculation begins that they are recording the work for a documentary and that Camilla pulled out to avoid being in the footage.

November 9, 2019: The royal family attends the Festival of Remembrance at Royal Albert Hall. Harry and Meghan are shoved into the back row behind a pillar, barely visible on camera. (It's a demotion, because in 2018 they were seated behind Camilla.)

November 10, 2019: Remembrance Day/Sunday. The Queen, Camilla, and Kate watch from the center balcony. Meghan watches from a side balcony between Sophie and Tim. She holds her composure at being excluded from the 'main' balcony better this year than last year (in 2018, she kept stealing weepy or vengeful looks (YMMV) at the center balcony while she was sidelined with the wife of the President of Germany) but she still clenches her jaw.

This is Meghan's final entry in the Court Circular (ever).

December 20, 2019: The Sussexes announce they will spend the Christmas and New Year's holidays privately in Canada.

November 17, 2019: Harry's last entry in the Court Circular before Megxit, suggesting he and Meghan peaced out to Canada shortly after this (I'm too lazy to look up if there were any papwalks or other private engagements - another day, maybe). His final events are January 16, 2020 (a rugby thing); Philip's funeral; the service of thanksgiving for the Platinum Jubilee; and The Queen's Funeral.

And if you made it this far: congratulations! My asks are back open.

[agent-calivide]

So, I saw somebody asking why there were less cigars in IEYTD 3 comparatively to IEYTD and IEYTD 2, and somebody said it was due to Schell trying to keep the game's rating lower. While I do believe that and do think that makes sense, I'm still gonna break it down from a character and level design analysis stance anyhow because that's just how I am.

running through all of the games, there's actually a lot less cigars than I remember. I thought every level had cigars, but actually no.

IEYTD- Friendly Skies (Zor's car) Winter Break (Zor's desk) First Class (Gift from room service) Seat of power (Zor's chair) Death Engine (Floating around in Zor's Death Laser)

IEYTD 2- Jet Set (trapped) Rising Phoenix (Zor's elevator) (seriously that's it)

IEYTD 3- Hot Water (Zor's Vending Machine)

I might have missed one, I reset my IEYTD 3 save and don't have the motivation to play the car level again at the moment, but for narrative satisfaction purposes, if these are all the cigars, there's a pattern here.

Nearly every time there's a cigar that is safe to smoke, it is Zor's property. It's Zor's car, Zor's hunting lodge, Zor's office, an elevator designed and paid for by Zor, a machine put in by Zor for profit, a death laser Zor commissioned even if they're not the pilot.

The reason that Phoenix is finding less and less cigars has less to do with the agent cutting back, and more to do with the agent not having as much access to Zor's personal space, and this makes sense! In the first game, the agent was a nobody that Zor hardly cared about enough to leave a petty note and a pinless grenade for, but by IEYTD 3 they're making elaborate, multi-step traps that entail calculating Phoenix's every step. Phoenix isn't getting near Zor's personal bases, because Zor doesn't want them there. Zor's acutely aware of them, and they are taking steps to ensure that agent stays far. Far. Away.

The agent can't find their personal vehicles and private offices if they're too busy chasing the bread crumbs Zor has left for them to stop the world from ending. And we know that's what Zor's doing, because when the agent was sent on a random mission in New Zealand that was a detour from their mission to track down Prism, Zor left them a personal message.

Zor knows where Phoenix is at all times, because they decide where the agent will go next.