American aftershock: Hasan Piker, Abdul El-Sayed and 25 years of 9/11
Paul Swartz - Voice Editor
Graphic by Anshul Dalal
September 11, 2001. An explosion rocks New York City. The World Trade Center has been destroyed. Innocent lives have been lost.
A quarter-century after the largest terrorist attack on U.S. soil, 9/11 still looms large over the country.
For many, the date is the most infamous in American history. It’s widely seen as one of the most horrific moments the country has ever experienced. There are documentaries, movies, books, shows and countless other ways the story has been retold.
Now, a new chapter in the story of the most influential day in 21st-century America is being written.
The race for Michigan’s Senate seat has narrowed down to Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers. The biggest story of the election so far, however, hasn’t been a policy either candidate supports. It hasn’t even been about either candidate.
It’s been about Hasan Piker.
Piker is a left-wing political commentary livestreamer who has become one of the most influential voices for the online socialist movement. He campaigned with and interviewed New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and has thrown his support behind El-Sayed in the Michigan Senate race.
His most lasting impact on the race wasn’t a statement he made during the campaign, but in 2019.
“America deserved 9/11.”
Those three words have followed Piker for the past seven years, and have latched onto El-Sayed by association. The candidate has been repeatedly asked if he agrees with the statement, or advised to disavow Piker entirely. El-Sayed has largely brushed it off as irrelevant to the race, which he’s correct about. But the media won’t let it go.
So let’s really unpack Piker’s words and how a sensationalist statement from an up-and-coming streamer became sensationalized further.
First, Piker had nowhere near the influence he did in 2019 as he does now. He was likely trying to find a way to distinguish himself from other voices in the same sphere, and did so in a reactionary way. If you asked him, he’d probably say he regrets the statement.
But I don’t think he regrets the sentiment.
“America deserved 9/11” is a synthesis of a much more complex idea. The point Piker was trying to get across was that it was America’s violent intervention in the Middle East that directly resulted in the terrorist attack.
And he’s not wrong.
The American military armed rebel groups, helped stage coups and destabilized governments, creating much of the chaos in the region it now condemns. While many of those regimes certainly were undemocratic, the U.S. wasn’t intervening out of the goodness of its heart. It was an excuse to leverage control over the region.
Piker’s wording, while blunt, was specific, at least in part. He didn’t say “Americans” deserved 9/11, as in it’s a good thing nearly three thousand innocent people died. He said “America” deserved 9/11, as in the system and institution that created the fertile ground which bred terrorist groups like al-Qaeda, and then acted surprised when its chickens came home to roost.
It’s also worth noting how often similar stories to 9/11 play out across the ocean as a direct result of American military action, and the global reaction is never as potent.
February 13, 1991. An explosion rocks Baghdad. A bomb shelter has been destroyed. Innocent lives have been lost.
The Amiriyah Shelter bombing predates 9/11 by more than 10 years. The U.S. sent laser-guided missiles into an air defense shelter that housed civilians, killing 408 innocent people. The general consensus is that American decision-makers knew it was a civilian target, despite claims it was a military one.
For the record, I don’t agree with the eye-for-an-eye brand of retribution Piker evidently subscribes to. But his statement has been twisted by networks like Fox News for the sake of trying to dunk on a political candidate.
I would argue that’s just as disrespectful to the victims of 9/11.
And to his credit, Piker’s point about American intervention in the Middle East has only become more salient. The U.S. continues to provide military support to Israel, despite the country carrying out a genocide against Palestinians, simply to retain power. It has gone to war with Iran for the same reason. And we’ve seen the same kinds of stories play out before.
February 28, 2026. An explosion rocks the Iranian city of Minab. A school has been destroyed. Innocent lives have been lost.
On the first day of the war in Iran, an American Tomahawk missile slammed into an elementary school, killing 156 civilians, including 120 children.
Do you see the pattern now?
The events I’ve cited as evidence of U.S. intervention are far from the only ones. Its imperialism is often more systemic than shocking. But they’re good illustrations.
Three moments in three countries at three different times.
Only one drew worldwide outrage.
Only one sparked a decades-long war on terror.
Only one is still cited today as a black mark on the campaign of a candidate who has said nothing about the event other than that it was a tragedy.
To the government, the military and the media, they’ve never cared about the lives lost. They’ve never cared if they have been participants in genocide for years. They don’t care that buildings are falling out of skylines.
We want to let you know that we use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are okay with it.
Paul Swartz
Comics are for kids
The first comic book I read was “Batman ‘66.” It
You may not own what you purchase: Licensed content vs. digital ownership
Since the dawn of digital media, one question has persisted:
‘Coyote vs. Acme’ is a triumphant underdog story
This article contains spoilers for “Coyote vs. Acme” (2026) In
‘The Dog Stars’ shines in spite of itself
This review contains spoilers for “The Dog Stars” (2026) In
New year, new friends, new opportunities to organize
The past two years have seen one of the largest
American aftershock: Hasan Piker, Abdul El-Sayed and 25 years of 9/11
September 11, 2001. An explosion rocks New York City. The World Trade Center has been destroyed. Innocent lives have been lost.
A quarter-century after the largest terrorist attack on U.S. soil, 9/11 still looms large over the country.
For many, the date is the most infamous in American history. It’s widely seen as one of the most horrific moments the country has ever experienced. There are documentaries, movies, books, shows and countless other ways the story has been retold.
Now, a new chapter in the story of the most influential day in 21st-century America is being written.
The race for Michigan’s Senate seat has narrowed down to Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers. The biggest story of the election so far, however, hasn’t been a policy either candidate supports. It hasn’t even been about either candidate.
It’s been about Hasan Piker.
Piker is a left-wing political commentary livestreamer who has become one of the most influential voices for the online socialist movement. He campaigned with and interviewed New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and has thrown his support behind El-Sayed in the Michigan Senate race.
His most lasting impact on the race wasn’t a statement he made during the campaign, but in 2019.
“America deserved 9/11.”
Those three words have followed Piker for the past seven years, and have latched onto El-Sayed by association. The candidate has been repeatedly asked if he agrees with the statement, or advised to disavow Piker entirely. El-Sayed has largely brushed it off as irrelevant to the race, which he’s correct about. But the media won’t let it go.
So let’s really unpack Piker’s words and how a sensationalist statement from an up-and-coming streamer became sensationalized further.
First, Piker had nowhere near the influence he did in 2019 as he does now. He was likely trying to find a way to distinguish himself from other voices in the same sphere, and did so in a reactionary way. If you asked him, he’d probably say he regrets the statement.
But I don’t think he regrets the sentiment.
“America deserved 9/11” is a synthesis of a much more complex idea. The point Piker was trying to get across was that it was America’s violent intervention in the Middle East that directly resulted in the terrorist attack.
And he’s not wrong.
The American military armed rebel groups, helped stage coups and destabilized governments, creating much of the chaos in the region it now condemns. While many of those regimes certainly were undemocratic, the U.S. wasn’t intervening out of the goodness of its heart. It was an excuse to leverage control over the region.
Piker’s wording, while blunt, was specific, at least in part. He didn’t say “Americans” deserved 9/11, as in it’s a good thing nearly three thousand innocent people died. He said “America” deserved 9/11, as in the system and institution that created the fertile ground which bred terrorist groups like al-Qaeda, and then acted surprised when its chickens came home to roost.
It’s also worth noting how often similar stories to 9/11 play out across the ocean as a direct result of American military action, and the global reaction is never as potent.
February 13, 1991. An explosion rocks Baghdad. A bomb shelter has been destroyed. Innocent lives have been lost.
The Amiriyah Shelter bombing predates 9/11 by more than 10 years. The U.S. sent laser-guided missiles into an air defense shelter that housed civilians, killing 408 innocent people. The general consensus is that American decision-makers knew it was a civilian target, despite claims it was a military one.
For the record, I don’t agree with the eye-for-an-eye brand of retribution Piker evidently subscribes to. But his statement has been twisted by networks like Fox News for the sake of trying to dunk on a political candidate.
I would argue that’s just as disrespectful to the victims of 9/11.
And to his credit, Piker’s point about American intervention in the Middle East has only become more salient. The U.S. continues to provide military support to Israel, despite the country carrying out a genocide against Palestinians, simply to retain power. It has gone to war with Iran for the same reason. And we’ve seen the same kinds of stories play out before.
February 28, 2026. An explosion rocks the Iranian city of Minab. A school has been destroyed. Innocent lives have been lost.
On the first day of the war in Iran, an American Tomahawk missile slammed into an elementary school, killing 156 civilians, including 120 children.
Do you see the pattern now?
The events I’ve cited as evidence of U.S. intervention are far from the only ones. Its imperialism is often more systemic than shocking. But they’re good illustrations.
Three moments in three countries at three different times.
Only one drew worldwide outrage.
Only one sparked a decades-long war on terror.
Only one is still cited today as a black mark on the campaign of a candidate who has said nothing about the event other than that it was a tragedy.
To the government, the military and the media, they’ve never cared about the lives lost. They’ve never cared if they have been participants in genocide for years. They don’t care that buildings are falling out of skylines.
Just as long as they aren’t falling out of ours.