He’s finally done it. After nine years together, approximately 76 fascinators and most of Will’s head of hair, the second in line to the throne has managed to get down on bended knee and give his long-time girlfriend one hell of a sparkler (12 carats in fact).

The apparently happy couple last night. Picture: Getty

It propels Kate Middleton, long the fodder of the voracious paparazzi pack and Hello! devotees, well and truly into the global spotlight.

And it is today that the work really begins for Catherine Middleton. She faces perhaps the most daunting and dramatic transformations, to somehow deftly emerge from the shadow of one the most iconic, albeit neurotic, personalities of the 20th century.

Every step Middleton takes, every charity she supports, every designer she wears, this future Princess will face constant comparisons with the former Lady Diana Spencer and the profound impact she had upon the Royal families’ fortunes.

Every day Middleton will look at her left hand and feel the carat weight of history bearing down on her.

Every day she will have to confront Diana’s legacy, the woman who single -handedly wrangled the British Monarchy into the celebrity-saturated modern landscape with a prodigious media savvy.

How will Middleton compare to her not particularly bright mother-in-law who, years younger than Catherine is now, managed to transform herself into one of the most globally-resonant figures in history?

Diana crafted a crusading persona, bold, passionate, and committed, and stepped up to assume a prominent place on the international stage unlike any other member of the royal family, politician or celebrity. Not bad for a shy, Barbara Cartland-loving girl whose only academic prize was for “helpfulness” and left school at 16.

Though that particular fairytale did not end so well for the courtiers at Buckingham Palace, the royal family has seemingly pinned their hopes on remaining relevant well into the 21st century on Middleton carving out an equally prominent place on the global cultural landscape.

Somehow the Windsors’ future has come to rest on this bland- at- best young couple. Though Catherine is unquestionably very pretty, this couple have a dearth of magneticism or allure.

Because really what Diana brought to Buckingham Palace was sex. The Princess of Wales, despite famously having walked up the aisle a virgin, brought with her a dose of modern sex appeal.

In the last three decades the world has been lumped with Charles, gardening buff and tampon aficionado. In recent years we have had the Search and Rescue Prince William with his increasingly prominent balding pate dashing into danger to rescue lives.

But Wills has never quite morphed into the sex symbol his teenage good looks promised. Several hundred years of genetic legacy have bestowed him with average at best looks.
Whether Kate is up to challenge of wrenching the British royal family back into the hearts and minds of a disaffected populace facing a bleak economic future is an intriguing question.

Never during her years of enduring the Waity Katy taunts has anything even vaguely resembling a hint of personality crept through the demurely made-up, rictus front.

Even Middleton’s voice has largely been a mystery until yesterday when the 28- year-old fronted a barrage of cameras with her balding beloved and opened her mouth for the first time.

Kate, sorry Catherine, has thus far been largely a blank. For the better part of the last decade this young woman has managed to avoid achieving anything of any consequence.

What is in the public domain is scant at best. A second class degree in Art History; a brief stint working as an accessories buyer for a middle-of-the-road British fashion chain; an occasional helping hand behind the scenes at her parents’ party supply business.

She has managed to essentially do nothing with the past few years beyond acquire a no-doubt impressive collection of hats and host a charity roller disco. (The yellow hot pants were a big mistake Kate.)

Which is pretty much exactly what Diana had under her belt 30 years ago when she and Charles made the same journey as Kate did yesterday to front the world’s media and break the joyous news.

Most commented

109 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • AFR says:

      11:03am | 17/11/10

      I just don’t see how this bunch of in-breds is relevant to the leadership of our nation.

    • Steve Smith says:

      11:33am | 17/11/10

      Then do some research.. it’s pretty clear.

    • Rosie says:

      11:57am | 17/11/10

      Gosh AFR which side of the bed did you hop out of THIS GREAT MORNING ?????

      On a beautiful day like today with the great news of Prince Willam’s engagement to Catherine Middleton his long time girlfriend I would hate to be in your company!

      I also didn’t realize Punch only dealt with the “leadership of our nation.”

      Catherrine Middleton has already proven she is capable of doing what it takes to be “royalty correct” to stand by the man she has patiently waited for. She has not tried to grab the limelight and up until now has left it to the Prince and will as royal protocol goes will remain one step behind when ever the two of them are in public!

      Already we are hearing how the Prince proposed with his mother’s famous engagement ring, the ring that is carrying a lot of baggage! I say Good Luck to them and what a lovely gesture on Prince William’s part and even more so for his fiance to accept the ring because of the reason he wanted her to have it.

      If they believe strongly in the unconditional love they have for each and are honest with it, nothing will get in their way not even her late mother in law’s engagement ring. If anything it will a blessing! Best wishes for a long happy life together!

    • kat says:

      12:56pm | 17/11/10

      I would wish these dignified, intelligent people to lead our nation, instead of the current morons. Maybe you could learn some decent manners by researching more facts about the Royal family!

    • Tony Fellows says:

      10:12pm | 17/11/10

      Neither do I and I’m English.  I think its about time the British monarchy kicked you colonial michiefs into touch and cut all historical links.  I am sick and tired of Aussie barracking about this misdemeanour of history. What should have happened is all those thieving convicts who were destined for transportation should have instead been murdered at sea instead of shipping them off to Aboriginal land.  Then we would never have wankers like you.

    • acotrel says:

      06:50am | 18/11/10

      Let me explain it to you?  The conservatives in Australia have a born to rule mentality.  It comes from their historical association with the monarchy as aristocrats.  They’ve enjoyed privelege in the past and have come to expect it to continue.  Their whole mindset revolves around the Queen. The effects on our democracy are ongoing, and seen in the antics of the Liberal Party when they lose an election

    • Rich says:

      07:33am | 18/11/10

      Bring back the Monarchy I say, the west was far better off with it.

      Most people need leadership not democracy. Groups that work democratically end up losing to those with a leader. You cannot expect people to be knowledgable enough about all the issues of the country AND be parents AND work a job. So how can these people be informed voters?? This includes myself.

      Democracy is cumbersome and I support reinstatement of the British Empire.

    • Human says:

      02:14pm | 18/11/10

      I am with AFR.. I do not care about them at all. I don’t care about the Commonwealth… and I don’t care about Governments and Royal ‘inbred’ Families. As long as I am able to do what I want, when I want, who cares what is happening else where. Unless of course it is the Zionist Israeli’s raping Palestinians for their land, which no one else seems to give a shit about. Get your priorities straight humans!

    • Human says:

      02:41pm | 18/11/10

      @Rich: Rich is correct. Most average people without dreams are useless, stupid and need direction. Australian’s currently live in a PRETEND Democracy. Majority does NOT rule. The powerful and wealthy minority win the votes. Australia needs an intelligent dictator - like me.

    • Royalist says:

      11:20am | 17/11/10

      Can’t we just be happy for them and wish them well????? Shiesh…

    • acotrel says:

      07:33am | 18/11/10

      When I’ve been in London, I’ve loved watching the changing of the guard at Buck palace!

    • nosthow says:

      11:24am | 17/11/10

      Nothing will save the Royal Family - its only a matter of time and when Betty Windsor “passes on” the ratbags that are left will soon self destruct. But you cant blame poor old Kate for wanting a bite of the cherry before it disappears can you ? Nice lass if a little gullible !

    • Steve says:

      11:38am | 17/11/10

      such bitterness about something that really has no impact on our daily lives.  Let it go.

    • Billy B says:

      05:46pm | 17/11/10

      nosthow - You say ‘Nothing will save the Royal Family’.  Well, they have been going a heck of a long time.  Why do you want to change ‘tradition’?

    • The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

      11:27am | 17/11/10

      In which other job are you trained for life? 

      Plus, they are worth squillions to the British tourism industry.

    • KH says:

      11:46am | 17/11/10

      That’s right.  The BRITISH tourism industry.  What do we need them for?!  Meh - the queen will die and then it will be on…....I can wait - I will outlive the old biddy….......

    • T.Chong says:

      11:32am | 17/11/10

      According to many conservatives, these two are their ( the conservatives)  “betters”.  Why?
      They represent unearned privelege, based, not on the merits of the individual, but on who their forebears slept with.- Thats it.
      Thats the only qualification any of these royals have, when it comes to being invested with divine wisdom.
      But that wont stop otherwise rational people fawning about a family , with varios “royal “hangers on - eg Fergie and Beatrice, and treating these people as some type of their gods chosen represntative on earth.
      Yeah, they are good for tourism, because thats what they are, a historical, political , social odditty, with just as much modern day relavance as The Piltdown Man.

    • Steve says:

      12:24pm | 17/11/10

      T. Chong, I would be a conservative in your eyes but I don’t think that the Royals are my betters, and I don’t know any conservative that would.

      If you want to talk about inherited priviledges and access, lets talk about Kim Beazley’s dad, Simon Crean’s father, Joel Fitzgibbons relatives, etc and the broader ALP web of family ties and influence.  Jobs for husbands and wives, anyone?

    • Jim says:

      12:53pm | 17/11/10

      ...sorry to do a Badger on you, can’t help myself

      According to many rusted on Laborites, these two (Gillard and Swann)are their ( the Laborites)  “betters”.  Why?
      They represent unearned privelege, based, not on the merits of the individual, but on who they trampled over and backstabbed on the way to the top.- Thats it.
      Thats the only qualification any of these clowns have, when it comes to being invested with divine wisdom.
      But that wont stop otherwise rational people fawning about a party , with varios “watermelon “hangers on - eg KRudd and Brown, and treating these people as some type of their gods chosen represntative on earth.
      Yeah, they are good for nothing, because thats what they are, a historical, political , social odditty, with just as much modern day relavance as The Piltdown Man.

    • Reg says:

      03:50pm | 17/11/10

      Come on you two, sliding off the subject into political spite does not answer the question of why these people are regarded as better than someone else just because they have their roots in the soil of Germany.

      We all know of the “Royal they Love to Hate” which is why the Queen has never visited the city of her families origin. The Royal that Queen Victoria directly sentenced to be a follower of Hitler. No wonder they seek to inject new blood into the family in an attempt to dispel the family curse.

    • Sludger says:

      04:01pm | 17/11/10

      Good on ya Jim, couldn’t have said it better myself. Actually, I didn’t say it at all, but I think it!!

    • Mara says:

      07:02pm | 17/11/10

      For your misculture, Reg, Hitler was Austrian, but bad anyway.
      And you might be as English as the Queen, if you are not a local wink
      It is not about being Royal or rich,, it is about being a good example (which you are certainly not!). Why should people be more interested in Pamela Anderson??? At least the Royal Family has class and distinction, maybe that is bothering you? 
      We need more literrate and elegant people (not speaking about clothes now!) or we will end all Bogans, and our children will be very sad, at the rand of the civilisation.
      Why did Australia got mad about Mary of Denmark, I think that she is another great personality, to be proud of. Not because they get rich, but because they are able to rise to the expectations of more than 1000 years of tradition and history (the making of Australia included smile)

    • T.Chong says:

      07:09pm | 17/11/10

      Thanks Jim, I recall somrthing about imitation being the sincerest form of flattery. ; )

    • Tony Fellows says:

      10:18pm | 17/11/10

      Wow - someone with a name like Chong obviously from China - the biggest corrupted state on the planet.  In China if you know someone in the heirarchy then your in big time.  Although because its not transparent they think its fine.  The British Royal family are transparent - a big difference T.Chong - perhaps you should look east before critising a democracy !!

    • hughie says:

      11:34am | 17/11/10

      Why does republicanism always seem to equal spite or bitterness when these things happen?  If that’s all you got we’ll be toasting William and Kate’s kids for a long time to come.  Good luck to the happy couple.

    • Bruce says:

      03:54pm | 17/11/10

      Hughie: Thats because some pro republicans have a hatred of Australia, and Australian history, and can not wait until we loose our Aussie national identity and become a socialist communist state.

    • Seano says:

      11:38am | 17/11/10

      Can’t wait till we ditch the lot of them.

    • acotrel says:

      08:40am | 18/11/10

      Our ‘history’ - like the bit about the kangaroo aristocracy?

    • Seano says:

      05:23pm | 18/11/10

      We can keep the history without having to put up with this silliness in future.

    • Unimpressed says:

      11:47am | 17/11/10

      What a useless nasty article. And straight after an article about “Body Image” being a huge problem in this society.

    • T.Chong says:

      11:47am | 17/11/10

      Calling all Loyal Monarchists - Shock, Horror !  Prince Billy is going to marry,
      a MUGGLE !
      She, obviosly is not divine, that means any kid will only be half divne !
      Old man Malfoy knows what happens when you muddy the waters.
      Oh Lordy, god save the monarchy.
      How could one of “them “, (you know, those without royal blood) be allowed thru Buck Palaces front door ?
      Charles 2nd, must still be a spinning.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      12:39pm | 17/11/10

      T Chong :  You can always go back to where you came from and leave Australians to celebrate the couples engagement.  Good luck to them both.  God save the Queen - nothing will save Joolya.

    • Richard says:

      01:02pm | 17/11/10

      I always figured you would be from slytherin T.C

    • S.L says:

      12:02pm | 17/11/10

      Kate has just signed her private life away. Just look at this article! Daniela the way I read it you have a problem with Kate Middleton with your remarks on her “lack of achievement” up until yesterday when she snared the biggest fish in the upper class English singles scene. I also like your description of Diana as nuerotic. How could she have become that? Saturation media scrutiny perhaps?
      The monachy mean nothing to me but if Kate and Wills are happy good on ‘em!

    • MarK says:

      12:05pm | 17/11/10

      The vitriol is quite amazing.

      And the “opinions” Of people like TC predictable.

      Class warfare alive and well I see. What a shame. Still it is good form to toss a shoe at things you fear, don’t understand and exaggerate these days I guess.

      Good luck to two young people that have had anything but ordinary lives and will be under, and have been under, more public pressure than any of us will face or comprehend.

      As to the question raised by Daniela…..meh. So much time, money and energy wasted over such a non issue.

      Never ceases to amaze me how sensitive some people are and how unsure of their own identity or place that they resort to the comfort of booting the history of Australia up the arse.

      I don’t feel less Australian because the Queen/Royals are there. I recognise and acknowledge the importance of England to this nation historically.

      To suggest I feel less or more “good” “proud” or “whatever” because of the current situation is ridiculous.

      Get over yourselves.

    • fairsfair says:

      12:56pm | 17/11/10

      I agree 100% MarK. Last night I was watching packed to the rafters and ch7 rolled across the bottom the breaking news sentence. That was really all I wanted to see. I thought “how nice, good on them, I wish them well”. But then this morning the today show “interupted their regular program” to twaddle on about Diana. That is what turns me off. I am really happy for them - but I blame the media for the perpetuation of this issue. I am in favour of the Royal/Commonwealth set up as it is our History. I can’t see the sense in removing something that doesn’t really affect our daily lives but reminds us all of where we came from (and yes us ALL). You may not be of English/GB decent - but without them - Australia would not be what it is today - a fundamentally great place.
      But I am growing tired of the beat up of it all and wish they could be left alone to enjoy life. I will simply avoid the telly for the next few days to keep my sanity - I am sure that they wish they could do that sometimes. On the other hand you have fools that will use what should be a pleasant piece of news and twist it into some urgent moral/political issue. I am waiting for Adam Bandt to link his policy announcement yesterday into this… give it time I suppose.

    • acotrel says:

      08:45am | 18/11/10

      I wonder what Ita Buttarse thinks about all this engagement stuff? I’ll bet Rupert Murdoch is rubbing his hands together?

    • Reginald says:

      12:19pm | 17/11/10

      The palace is a dignified place. Why should it be “sexy” to please narrow minded misfits who have only ine thing on their minds?

    • Lazy Jesus says:

      01:19pm | 17/11/10

      Indeed, the British Royal family is the very definition of chaste and dignified behaviour.

      *chortle*

    • jane wallace says:

      12:22pm | 17/11/10

      well may we says god save the queen because nothing will save the royal family.
      the proclamation of marriage declared by royal family has been countersigned by prince william who will go down in hostory from Prince Charles birthday celebrations 2010 as the Mate of Kate’.
      maintain the celebrations

    • Jane Wallace says:

      12:27pm | 17/11/10

      Let Kate the Great and Will the dill pay for their own wedding.
      Its Time for an Australian Republic , a new flag,and new national anthem.

    • Steve says:

      01:49pm | 17/11/10

      Yep, that will solve so many,many problems.  Won’t it, Jane.

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      03:56pm | 17/11/10

      Coming out from under the UK’s skirt? It might be enough to get us thinking about starting to grow up Steve.  We’re like a bunch of spoilt children squabbling over who gets their fair share of this very rich cake.

    • Rob says:

      06:30pm | 17/11/10

      Jane,if you can get the Government to stop paying my hard earned to slags who can’t keep thier knees together long enough not to give birth to 6 or 7 no hopers, to 6 or 7 different fathers,or to dead beat junkies to shoot up,I’ll personally pay for the wedding.It would have to be at my local church and the reception at my golf club but me thinks my money will be safe don’t you?

    • Sid says:

      12:28pm | 17/11/10

      I hope for William’s sake that she is not treacherous like Di & Fergie

    • mickijo says:

      11:33am | 18/11/10

      I hope for Catherine’s sake, he hasn’t got a Lady Camel hiding somewhere.

    • Lazy Jesus says:

      12:30pm | 17/11/10

      As long as Kate can stay in her own bed, she’ll be doing better than the last one.

    • Gregg says:

      12:40pm | 17/11/10

      Did you know Diana so well Daniella to take a snipe at her with being not particularly bright!
      Do you even know so much of Catherine or just wanted to write of what is unknown because she has wanted to keep her life as private as she can.

      Sure, many people other than the Brits loved Diana for she was so young and pretty enough to fill that image of being a real fairytale princess but ” sex appeal ” , might be something the media and minds like yours may wrestle with but it is about as relevant as your view on blandness and dearth.
      Perhaps the looks of Prince William do not appeal to you but he seems a reasonable sort of a bloke and whatever sort of a monarch he becomes, why as others have said can it not be best wishes for them.

      I would not mind a wager that there will still be many Brits and others who will admire the couple even if the royal family means little to myself though there are some who would argue that it was Queen Victoria who was a great driver of the British Empire and before her reign perhaps except for a more prominent monarchy it could be that Dutch, Portuguese, Indonesian or even Mandarin could have been the language spoken downunder..

    • Brad says:

      03:11pm | 17/11/10

      and so what if it was - it is all luck.

      La Perouse sailed into Sydney only days after the English so we could have very easily been French.

      Regardless, Australia has grown up (for the most part) and it is time to let go of mummy England’s apron strings and stand up for ourselves with our own identity & our own home grown head of state - not someone who visits every couple of years.

    • Reg says:

      04:07pm | 17/11/10

      I am impressed that the old Royal blood of Europe is again reaching to the antipodes to inject something better into their offspring. Only better still would have been to choose a Chinese or Indonesian bride.

    • Gregg says:

      01:54am | 18/11/10

      I think enough of us are grown up enough Brad to know it is nothing about Mummy’s apron strings and that we do stand up for ourselves, have our own identity even if the Koreans gave us a Dirndl national females outfit and a Governor General is more than enough head of state than we need to have at all and no need to replace the position with a President.
      Would you want a situation like the US and lame ducks when we have enough of a lame duck parliament as an example
      Do we really need anything else but a parliament and even less of them as long as we have a government prepared and able to govern, something sorely lacking.

    • Peter says:

      12:51pm | 17/11/10

      Princess Diana’s 2 young boys have already saved the Royal family. I’m sure Kate will be a fine addition..

    • Pip says:

      12:53pm | 17/11/10

      Get real they are just like every other young couple, who wish to tie the knot, the only difference is he was born Royal, and carries all that baggage that goes with being a Windsor, I personally wish them well, and one day if he’s the King, he may set us free, meanwhile British Tourism and the mags are saved once again.

    • A commoner says:

      01:07pm | 17/11/10

      Off with the head of the headline writer. It’s not the English Royal Family - it’s the British Royal Family and led by The Queen who also happens to be the head of state of the UK and 15 commonwealth realms including Australia.

      Not being pedantic but so simply call it an “English royal family” shows a complete lack of understanding for the family and its relationship to Britain and the commonwealth.

    • Beiha Yanez says:

      01:08pm | 17/11/10

      Although I am a staunch republican and do not see the relevance of the British monarchy in modern Australian society, I cannot comprehend some of the petty and vitriolic comments directed at this young couple. Good for them and I wish them happiness. Now let us, the public, and the media leave them alone.

    • Rosie says:

      01:19pm | 17/11/10

      Thanks Gregg! Great post! The news made my day!

      I find it difficult to understand how people can be so negative and nasty about what some of us find as complete enjoyment - the “real fairytale princess” thing in this topsy turvy world!

    • loxy says:

      01:23pm | 17/11/10

      Wow what a bitchy article Elser. I don’t claim to be a fan of the royal family and in fact I think they are an out-dated and useless tradition. However, that being said I don’t see any need to attack Dianna’s intelligence, Will’s looks or Kate’s achievements. Scrap the royal family stuff and this is simply a young couple in love and who are getting married which is in my opinion a happy thing!

    • Romli065 says:

      02:20pm | 17/11/10

      Here here loxy, couldn’t agree more.  The author was particularly biting and nasty about what should be a good news story.  What’s up with that?  Methinks she protesteth too much ...

    • marley says:

      02:43pm | 17/11/10

      I’m not a royalist, or much of a fan of most of the royals.  I think the institution is archaic and irrelevant to anyone outside the British Isles.  That being said, a “journalist” whose depth of analysis seems to consist of a fixation with the balding pate of the groom, is every bit as irrelevant as the happy couple.

    • Rob says:

      01:35pm | 17/11/10

      what a terribly dour way of looking at the situation Daniela. So dour you lost me about 4 paragraphs in.
      “Every day Middleton will look at her left hand and feel the carat weight of history bearing down on her.”
      No she won’t. To say so is ridiculous. Every time she’s reminded of the person behind the ring she’s wearing by the media she’ll think about it and probably feel bad about it. But to suggest the mere wearing of the ring will cause her to question her position in the Royal Family, in society and life in general.
      Give me a break.

      and to al of you out there that doesn’t see a point in the Royal Family or how it’s relevant to you. well you had the chance to move away from them and you didn’t take it. Too bad.

    • Paul says:

      02:07pm | 17/11/10

      Rocks.  Glass Houses.  Throwing.

    • mary wide bay says:

      02:18pm | 17/11/10

      Congrats to the young couple. Wishing them a wonderful future together with some sunshine thrown in from the Sunny Coast.

    • Lady J says:

      02:27pm | 17/11/10

      Funny how the green eyed monster pops its head up!!!

      This couple is wonderful, exceedingly well mannered, loving, and level headed enough to take their time, get to know one another over a long period of time and take the slow steady pace to become engaged then to marry. I think it is so lovely and to have them as our future heads of state fills me with a sense of relief I have not felt for a while.
      Long live the Prince and Princess and the future King and Queen!!

    • Captain Col says:

      02:53pm | 17/11/10

      You say, “this couple have a dearth of magneticism or allure” but forget that
      they are not in the business of getting themselves elected, nor getting onto the best pages of the gossip mags.  They are already there.

      So your sneering article might have been appropriate if it was about some aspiring starlet anxious to be noticed ... which is how you and the salivating media normally act regarding celebrities ... but this case is different.

      Shall we wait and see if you and your media mates join the throng and pantingly report every little detail of their lives rom now on.  I don’t think I’ll be waiting long.  They don’t need “magneticism or allure.”

    • iansand says:

      02:56pm | 17/11/10

      From what does the Royal family need saving?  Are the yokels with pitchforks at the gates?  Feed them cake and send them away.

    • Bex says:

      02:56pm | 17/11/10

      Royals/Celebrities or whatnot, people should stop being so negative and ridiculous and just look at it for what it is, a sweet and clearly happy couple in love and beaming about spending their lives together - why not just be happy for that fact? I couldn’t care less about the Royal family OR Celebrities but I haven’t got a single negative thing to say about this, I think it’s lovely.

    • William Essex says:

      03:00pm | 17/11/10

      London to a brick, the paparazzi will drive this sweet young thing to the edge of wishing she,d shacked up with anyone but the future King . Perhaps the ghost of Di will chuck in a good word for the sake of her sanity.

    • mickijo says:

      03:21pm | 17/11/10

      If he had waited much longer , he would never have made it on one knee, he’d have needed a footman on both sides to get there..Sure is not going to rush into anything.After such a long drawn out courtship, what on earth would they have to talk about?

    • Squeeze The Middle says:

      03:34pm | 17/11/10

      What’s this going to cost me?

    • Ben H says:

      03:48pm | 17/11/10

      Sorry to interrupt the whitewashed, ‘peaches and cream’ perception of the Royals apparently held by many…

      When she, too, learns the truth about the Windsors, will she divorce the Prince for a more suitable and capable man, become pregnant with his love child, and, at the eleventh hour, before announcing it to the world, suffer an amazingly synchronistic, fatal car ‘accident’? Or has this one been specially prepared to tow the line? I’m sure Queenie has inspected and groomed her with a fine-tooth comb to save another messy assassination and cover-up.

      The whole ring thing makes one wonder if Prince William knows his mum was assassinated, and is simply too cold blooded to care, or if he, too, believes the fanciful car crash story. Or is the Royal family’s image just too precious to be ruined by justice for one person? I think he was told long ago, and is playing along for what he thinks is the greater ‘good’.

    • Sludger says:

      04:51pm | 17/11/10

      Yes, it was assassination.  It was organized on the Nazi Moon Base, and the details sent to the greys living on earth.  Thanks to them, we have got rid of JFK, King and that Pesky Di so that the One World Order can finally take control.  But to be sure, we will fake another moon landing like Apollo 11 and fly remote control jets into a big building.  Keep the masses in fear.

    • Steve Putnam says:

      05:46pm | 17/11/10

      Perhaps you could share with us your views on 9/11, the 2008 US Presidential election and climate change.

    • Paul says:

      06:22pm | 17/11/10

      Sssshhhhhhh, they might hear you!! Put the foil hat back on, for God’s sake or they’ll track you down!

    • marley says:

      08:27pm | 17/11/10

      Golly gosh.  No one has ever died in a high-speed car crash, before so this just HAD to be a conspiracy. 

      Just one question.  Why?  Charles and Di were divorced.  What the hell reason would anyone have to murder her?  She’d already done as much damage as she was going to do to Charlie and his folks.  Embarrassment, humiliation even, but they’d ridden all of that out without bringing out the knives.  Why would they be worried about whatever Diane got up to on her own, long after the marriage breakup? 

      Sometimes accidents just happen.

    • Ben H says:

      04:31pm | 18/11/10

      Sludger, I hope you’re trying to take the piss.

      Steve, 911 was an inside job - the evidence is all around you, and you just have to look for it. Obama is (or at least was?) the ‘good cop’ after Bush and the bankster’s agenda is manifested in the policies of both. Mccain the fossil was just window dressing. It’s common sense not to pollute, but the green movement was long ago hijacked by both witting and unwitting globalist/bankster proxies. Do you want to live in a world with no rights AND be taxed on the carbon your breath emits? I barely pollute, so I don’t want to pay.

      Paul, whenever someone wheels-out cliched smears like ‘tin foil hat’, you just know they don’t have a leg to stand on.

      Marley, re-read my original post. In the eyes of the Queen and Phillip, Diana brought shame to the Royal family. Lizzy, especially, saw Diana as a mere tool to bear a future king. After this she was expendable. Then she spat in the Royals’ faces. Just ask Mohammed al Fayed.

      Could elaborate further but must go to work now. Cheers.

    • nosthow says:

      03:49pm | 17/11/10

      People have called me anti Royal but just to show my soft considerate side I wound like to invite Betty Windsor and hubby Phil The Greek to bring their new daughter in law Katie out to Australia with her hubby Prince Willy for a tour - provided the British Taxpayer pays for the junket !

    • R says:

      03:57pm | 17/11/10

      I’m happy for them!

    • bella starkey says:

      03:59pm | 17/11/10

      That Kate girl looks creepily like princess mary.

    • Farkurnell says:

      06:24pm | 17/11/10

      come off it bella our Princess Mary is heaps better looking than this common english princess.

    • Joan says:

      07:52pm | 17/11/10

      No way ... Kate with the hair that doghangs around her face reminds me of Fergie. Our Princess Mary more royal than any royal…. no doghair to be seen… just radiates regal beauty…. the Danes are lucky to have gotten her…she desereves an Oscara - at least she looks and plays the part satisfactorily.

    • Jen says:

      12:38pm | 18/11/10

      Joan & Farkurnell that is very hypocritical, the whole thing about Kate is that she is from a background just as humble as Mary. You attack Kate for beinga common princess when in fact so is Mary, you say Mary is more Royal than any Royal, well Kate is not a royal yet, just like Mary wasn’t unti she got married. So basically you are just attacking a girl who just like Mary, fell for a Prince and had a Prince fall for her. So I am afraid I dont; understand you attacks on this girl’s appearence, or how she looks and plays the part, she hasn;t started playin gthe part yet as she’s not yet married.

    • The Badger says:

      04:09pm | 17/11/10

      Thanks to the daily mash

      DREARY women across Britain finally have something new to talk about for the next six to nine months.
      As Clarence House confirmed the engagement of Prince William and Kate Middleton, women with turgid, empty, pitiful lives set up Facebook pages dedicated to a dress that does not yet exist.

      Jane Thompson and her friend Alice Maynard said in perfect unison: “Oh my God I’m so happy for them she’s going to look so beautiful they are the most perfect couple you have ever ever seen the wedding is going to be the high point of my life I’m sleeping on a pavement.”

      Thompson added: “Oh look, I think I’ve pissed myself.”

      The wedding ceremony will be held at either Westminster Abbey or St Paul’s Cathedral, followed by a reception filled with people who regard the likes of you as barely the same species.

      Prime minister David Cameron led the congratulations saying: “This is a great day for our country. Shut up, yes it is.

      “Once again Britain will lead the world as we make the most enormous fuss imaginable over two incredibly wealthy young people who have been handed everything on a plate.”

    • neil says:

      04:35pm | 17/11/10

      Judging from the longevity of the Windsor line William won’t be King until sometime around 2040. With the lack of conviction of the shown by the republican movement and the Australia public in general, I’d bet on him being King of Australia.

    • Nicole says:

      05:27pm | 17/11/10

      Oh lighten up people! Not everything has to be so damn serious! They’re obviously happy and excited. We get excited for people like P!nk, Katy Perry and even Lleyton and Bec Hewitt, surely we can just appreciate the sweetness of the occasion for these two!

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      09:11am | 19/11/10

      The 50% tax I pay is pretty serious.  How lightly do you think I’ll get treated by Billy’s machine if I try to get that monkey off my back.

    • Gael Carpani says:

      07:52pm | 17/11/10

      What a nasty, sneering, petty piece of ‘journalism’. Although I’m a Republican, this doesn’t prevent me from wishing this young couple lots of happiness in their future. Go take a chill pill and ditch the air of world-weary cynicism.Boring!

    • Vee says:

      10:41pm | 17/11/10

      Feel so removed from this - it’s just tabloid fodder - I’d rather read articles about Master Chef

    • Chris says:

      11:35pm | 17/11/10

      What a bundle of joy Badger is.  He would liven up proceedings everywhere.  Imagine him applying for a job as a “party entertainer”.

    • Mr. Grey says:

      01:14am | 18/11/10

      I think, inadvertently Diana has already saved the English monarchy from dissolving. Prince William appears to be just what they needed. Everyone can associate with him and he seems to be able to associate with everyone.

    • BobbyDan says:

      07:00am | 18/11/10

      The Badger: I look forward to your comments in todays (Friday 18/11/10) newspapers.
      The front page of my daily has a lady with a nice cup of tea and a plate with THE wedding of Charles and Dianna enblazomed on them, (I think there is steam coming out of the cup and there appears to be toast crumbs on the plate).

    • The Badger says:

      12:56pm | 18/11/10

      Friday is the 19th.

      I’m confused DanBobby are you back from the future?

    • BobbyDan says:

      03:32pm | 18/11/10

      The Badger: I just checked my sun dial and in West Ausralia we are 3 hours & 30 years behind the east coast so that accounts for some of the loss/gain factors.
      A large dose of home brewed COOPERS Pale Ale while waiting for the photos of Grand-daughters “Formal” and her early phone call did not help either.
      I therefore correct my post to: (Thursday 18/11/10 @ 07:00am). I apoligise if I confused you my treasured friend @ The PUNCH.

    • The Badger says:

      09:10am | 19/11/10

      Bobbydan

      I’m in WA and we are 3 hours and 40 years behind the east coast (except for QLD)

    • thatmosis says:

      08:27am | 18/11/10

      Another spunger off the public purse. Who bloody cares anyway its just another in bred royal marrying. nothing earth shattering about that. What would be earth shattering is if the bludger actually did something other than for publicity. Just wait for the frenzy to start and the copious amounts of money that will be made from this orchestrated bit of crap. Interesting to see if it last longer than his parents marriage though and who the kids look like???????

    • casba says:

      09:11am | 18/11/10

      @Acotrel

      Those ‘conservastives’ to whom you refer so disparagingly, can also spell-unlike you!  That alone sets them apart from lefties like you. You may not think you have the ‘born to rule’ mentality but it is just loosely disguised as a ‘born to pontificate to those who do not support your views and who therefore must immediately be labelled as red necks’ mentality.

    • Rick says:

      09:36am | 18/11/10

      The headline says it all.  The ‘English Royal Family’. What they have to do with Australia heaven knows!  One hopes that Citizen Windsor doesn’t allow his wife to be chewed up and spat out by the ‘Firm’ in the same way that his mother was.  Absolutely incredible that at a time when public servants are being sacked, salaries and pensions cut and charges for students being increased in what is the greatest cutback to budget spending in Britain’s history the intention is to spend a fortune on the wedding of one the country’s leading public servants.  The cuts have caused student riots and more may follow. When the populace are facing hard times such ostentatious spending may not be politic. The question may be not whether it will save the Monarchy but whether it will destroy it.

    • The Silence Is Deafening says:

      09:46am | 18/11/10

      Only if she has a LOT of soap and some scrubbing brushes and is willing to scrub like crazy to get the blood off this families hands.
      This being the same family that decided to fund a terrorist war against Rhodesia, the same family that harbored the terrorist leader whose minions shot down a civilian airliner “The Hunyani” followed by cheers from their people when they heard that the civilian survivors of that crash were caught up to by these terrorists and murdered in the most savage way,  not to mention the baby survivor who was bayoneted multiple time by these lovely fellows this family approved of.
      This family has blood on its hands Kate, you should have steered clear of these lowlifes, the Karma has been catching up with them of late and you might end up being collateral damage.

    • marley says:

      01:55pm | 18/11/10

      What the hell does the British Royal family have to do with this?

    • The Silence Is Deafening says:

      04:31pm | 18/11/10

      This is about the British Royal Family and what Ms Middleton is getting herself into!

    • marley says:

      08:19am | 19/11/10

      Like I said.  What does the British Royal Family have to do with Joshua Nkomo and ZAPU shooting down a Rhodesian passenger plane in the middle of a struggle for independence?

    • The Silence Is Deafening says:

      02:57pm | 19/11/10

      @marley: never forget that this is the same family who gave an honorary knighthood to Robert Mugabe at the very same time his 5th brigade forces were slaughtering innocent men, women and children in Matabeleland. Just lovely folk this lot.

    • marley says:

      06:59pm | 19/11/10

      You do understand, don’t you, that the Honours list is drawn up by the elected government of the day, not by the royal family.  The Queen simply signs off on whatever parliament approves.  So, no, the royals can’t be held accountable for Mugabe.

      And I’m still waiting for you to explain why they should be held accountable for Mugabe’s great enemy, Nkomo.

    • Chris says:

      01:09pm | 18/11/10

      Grow up you lot and take pleasure in a pleasant and intelligent young couple getting engaged.
      A lot of nonsense is spoken and written about the monarchy. The reality is that they are a bunch of ordinarily decent and hardworking people who hold a nation and a commonwealth of nations together. We are better off with them than we are without them. We may need them even more in the future than we do now, especially if Australians are foolish enought to keep voting in a Labor government which is as petty and mean spirited as this one is proving to be.
      I would rather a “royal family” and a “monarch” than an elected president with the capacity to divide rather than unite - or perhaps republicans would really prefer a dictator?

    • David says:

      04:36pm | 18/11/10

      Could not agree more! The media and the public should stop criticising and start acknowledging just how hard these people work. It may sound like fun. It’s damn boring. Ever been behind the scenes at a royal palace? I have been in two - it is anything but luxury behind the scenes. Seen a royal appointment book? It is crammed with things we never hear about.  These people are not spongers. They bring in more tourist dollars and pounds than most people could ever dream about (including the sports teams) and charities depend on them. You may depend on charity one day.
      I say get behind them. Give them your support - because they sure as heck give you theirs.

    • Seano says:

      05:26pm | 18/11/10

      How do you sensibly get from elected president to dicator in Australia?

    • Sandy says:

      08:40am | 19/11/10

      I’d agree with you if we’d kept appeals to the privy council open. The Monarch is purely symbolic now. If our parliament did get more dictatorial, the monarchy would be cut free long before they acted in our favour.

    • Chris says:

      10:01pm | 18/11/10

      I find it both interesting and comical the comments made by the Australian people on the news of William and Kate, also how Diana is also mentioned, ont so in the UK, no comparison`s to Diana, maybe it`s because she is no longer with us and opinions not as strong here either,  I believe the majority of the UK are hoping for an extra bank holiday to “celebrate” the marriage, that`ll do nicely

    • lola says:

      11:41pm | 19/11/10

      she had 9 years to get out of this..she made her choice..she is a grown up..each decision has a price to pay hers well no1 knows how much is gonna cost her…
      plus y do ppl still care about the british monarchy ?their part is decorative..

    • Penster says:

      10:52am | 20/11/10

      I’m not clear what Diana, Fergie and now Kate are meant to be “saving the Royal Family” from. Why would you expect a pretty, patient but otherwise unremarkable individual to save anything?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

@TheStalwart an analyst in Sydney said it was a "sad day" http://t.co/vh4Yu4OgDD. I think he was just exhausted and gave up analyzing

ToryShepherd

@CatherineDeveny @sydwritersfest A wobble

Paul Colgan

RT @NASA: Amazing views from the International Space Station of Pavlof Volcano erupting in Alaska. http://t.co/vqBkkiOful

Paul Colgan

US Google Doodle features a girl's touching depiction of her father's return from Iraq http://t.co/4LiRFOntTY

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter