headlines | about |

US Responsibility for 9/11

A few months after the 9/11 attacks, the New Museum exhibited works of the artists who had had studios in the World Trade Center. One of those artists was my artist-firm, Ocean Earth, but by a margin, namely the personal approval of such a residency by Mouktar Kocache.

The submission for the New Museum was rejected, however, as it violated a rule, not fully known to me then, that NOTHING be said about the 9/11 event,
or anything related to it.

The piece produced was a comparative study of the borders of Iran/Iraq/Kuwait/Saudi Arabia and of
New England/New York/New Jersey/Pennsylvania. The borders were nearly identical in form and size. In one case, they were made by the British Colonial Office in 1921. This fact was highlighted by Osama bin Laden as to a reason for the attack on the World Trade Center: his disappointment with the dividing up of Arabian territory in 1921, following the end of WW I, despite British promises otherwise. In the other case, the bordrs were made also by the British Colonial Office, but in 1664.

The piece was not shown or seen in New York.

It did not reach the public.

Later that year, it appeared in four museums in Europe, but so what. The US public never saw the
analysis in relation to Bin Laden's complaint.

About 14 months later, the US and UK launched a military attack on Iraq, leading to the current presence in Iraq, from three military bases, named "Camp New York," "Camp Pennsylvania" and "Camp New Jersey."

If the public had known about the parallel dividing-up practice of the British Colonial Office, once in 1664 and once in 1921, then the public would have seen that the attacks on Iraq were the brainchild of modern-day legatees of the British Colonial Office, i.e., the British Government. No American would have cooked up titles for the base camps of attack being the three one-time British colonies as carved up by the British Colonial Office in 1664. So, we can see who is behind the US-UK attack on Iraq: the Brits.

This constitutes a sort of "review" of artwork that appeared in shows, and catalog, of the Museum Ludwig, Cologne, Akademie der Kuenste, Berlin and Migros Museum, Zurich, with later appearances in the Kunsthalle Wien and Palais de Tokyo, Paris.

It is a genuine re-view. It gives us a chance to recall what was being noticed, and what came to pass historically, and what potential art has in showing the truth and possibly even guiding policy.

The issue is live now.

In New York recently, during the UN General Assembly speeches, the President of Iran and President of the US had sharp words for each other about 9/11.

The President of Iran said that the US and Israel were possibly "behind" the 9/11 attacks. The President of the US said this was "offensive" and "hateful," and he made the BOOHOO* move of saying how dare the President of Iran sully the memory of those killed, and tender feelings of their kin.

Both the President of Iran and President of the US are off the mark.

If we realize that all along the British had a strategy, and if we realize that the US got sucked into this with the 9/11 attacks,

and if we further realize that in such cases Cheshire grins will prevail,

then we can forget about trying to declare who is "behind" the 9/11 attacks, whether Israel, the US, the UK, or bin Laden, or El Qaeda, or...

it doesn't matter.

US foreign policy is why the attacks occurred.

Blame the US.

If El Quadea did it all alone, it's the fault of the US to have provoked them.

If some other entity did it, blah blah, it's also
the fault of the US.

So, it's irrelevant, and a waste of time and energy, to look into what happened. Or who did what.

US foreign policy, being beholden to British strategies and needs, is at fault.

US foreign policy has to change.

It does not do that.

Will it?

And can any art work possibly help make a
due waking up about US foreign policy occur?

The Tea Party makes much talk about a fresh
re-assertion of US founding principles. Fine.
Start with the Declaration of Independence, in
which the US asserts a geographical distance,
quite real, from the British Isles. Can that
be done again? Can the US disconnect from the
UK and start building a foreign policy based
on where it is, and what it is, both in Constitution and in natural resources?

For now, because the US is just a bully-boy for the British Empire, with a "foreign policy" of
service to that Empire, the comportment with
foreign cultures and countries will be flawed,
and will engender events of revenge, or self-destruction, call it what you will, like 9/11.


Probably no change is possible. The ties that bind are too strong. Witness how Michelle Obama, the wife of the President of a free republic called the United States, hugged the Queen in London. So much for any "declaration of independence." So much for the decorum to be expected between sovereign states.

*BooHoo is a cultural movement, popular since 9/11,
which has overwhelmed the art world and other parts of modern culture. Its precedents are Beaux Arts (1871-), Bauhaus (1918-), Beuys (1945-). BooHoo was especially presesnt at recent Documentas and in the US Pavilion of the 2008 Architecture Biennial in Venice.