the brilliantly leaping gazelle

Aah Sarker is in the news today.

Or to be be more accurate, the news that “The Daily Mail’ (DM) considers news and so they have judged a Twitter post of hers about the ongoing but now increasingly desperate search for the mini-submarine that went to look at the wreck of the Titanic, not just news, but outrage worthy news’

Guardian columnist Ash Sarkar sparks backlash with ‘utterly grotesque’ Titanic sub disaster tweet saying: ‘If the super-rich can spend £250,000 on vanity jaunt they’re not being taxed enough’

Leaving aside the dig that they got in about her writing for ‘The Guardian’, which is a code for meaning she’s soppy left-winger who writes for a soppy left-wing newspaper, which means DM readers can despise her without any guilt, they find space to mention that she has written 23 articles for them but sadly not over what timeframe they were written over.

It could be 23 this year alone. Who knows?

But no matter, the DM’s anger is righteous and in full flow, so go on then, what was this tweet that was so offensive, that so far exceeded the bounds of good taste that Twitter is known for, that another Twitter user felt that they had to reply, branding it ‘utterly grotesque’ and thus enabling the DM to manufacture a 500 word story out of?

I should warn you that this is shocking stuff.

‘If the super-rich can spend £250,000 on vanity jaunts 2.4 miles beneath the ocean then they’re not being taxed enough.’ 

What’s shocking about that is that her tweet isn’t shocking in the slightest, what is shocking is that it conclusively proves that the DM employs a team of people to monitor Twitter to create stories based on someone expressing an opinion that falls foul of the DM’s rather fluid morality.

I agree with her, I mean something is very wrong with the world where going down to explore the wreck of what after all is a mass grave, isn’t consider repugnant, but instead a thing that you can do if you have more money than morals. At what level of delusion do you have to be operating under to think that going 2.4 miles under the ocean is a good idea? The people that facilitate this kind of extremely expensive folly are just as much to blame. They turn a lunatic idea into a very real possibility.

She then had the sheer audacity, to respond to critics of that tweet to tweet back

‘The Titanic submarine is a modern morality tale of what happens when you have too much money, and the grotesque inequality and sympathy, attention and aid for those without it.

‘Migrants are ”meant” to die at sea; billionaire’s aren’t.’

Again, a rational response, so much so that ‘backlash’ continued. To which she responded – and I think a lot of Twitter users should do this, rather the plunge ever deeper into a digital rabbit hole of bile – to a critic by observing,

‘If you don’t like what I have to say, l’m perfectly comfortable with that. But perhaps you might be better off ignoring me, rather than howling incessantly into the void?

Of course the whole issue of the super rich not paying enough tax was always going to invoke the ire of the DM, given as how Viscount Rothermere, the owner of the DM, lives in a mansion in Monaco, identifies as French, has non-com British tax status, and because the DM is registered in the Bahama’s, pays no tax anywhere.