The Untold Truth of Michael Bay's '13 Hours'

Article Summary

Michael Bay's 13 Hours provides a stylish and action-packed depiction of the Benghazi attack that generally corresponds well with the known facts.

The film delves into controversial topics, including the purported "stand down" directive from the CIA Chief in Benghazi and the absence of air support, which have led to conflicting accounts from different sources and participants.

Despite these contentious debates, the film maintains a relatively accurate depiction, as Bay opts to side with the military personnel who protected the CIA Annex. This aligns with his inclination to narrate events from the perspective of everyday working-class individuals on the frontline.

What Really Happened in Benghazi?

Michael Bay’s 13 Hours presents a captivating and action-packed portrayal of the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack. However, the truth behind the incident has been clouded by partisan activists seeking to gain advantage over their political adversaries. As time has passed and the dust has settled, it becomes crucial to assess the film's accuracy. Based on the nonfiction book by journalist Mitchell Zuckoff, the film generally aligns with the known facts. Nevertheless, there are two contentious aspects depicted in the film that spark disagreement among various sources and participants. These include the alleged "stand down" order from the CIA Chief in Benghazi and the purported decision by military leaders to withhold air support. By delving into the veracity of these scenes, we gain insight into the divergent views on the truth of the attack held by those involved on the ground and those in positions of authority.

Image via Paramount Pictures

On September 11, 2012, militants from Ansar al-Sharia launched an assault on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. The compound was set on fire, resulting in the tragic death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. In response to the attack, a team of private military contractors known as Global Response Staff (GRS) hurried to a nearby CIA Annex to assist in devising a countermeasure. Although there is ongoing debate regarding whether the CIA Chief in Benghazi issued a formal "stand down" order, it is evident that GRS eventually made an effort to rescue anyone who might still be stranded in the diplomatic compound. Upon reaching the compound, their search for Ambassador Stevens amidst the thick smoke proved futile. After collecting any survivors and bodies they could locate, GRS returned to the CIA Annex. En route, their vehicle was targeted by militants, but they successfully returned to the Annex unharmed.

What Was the Controversy Over the Benghazi Stand-Down Order?

During the early hours of the morning, a group of militants launched a brutal assault on the CIA Annex. The militants were met with fierce resistance from the Guardian Response Security (GRS) team who valiantly fought off the attackers throughout the night. However, it wasn't until the following morning that additional reinforcements finally arrived. Upon their arrival, the Annex once again found itself under intense gunfire. Tragically, it was during this second attack that mortar rounds claimed the lives of Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

In light of the escalating danger, the decision was made to evacuate the Annex, ensuring the safety of everyone inside. They were promptly transported to the airport, away from the relentless hostilities. Meanwhile, while GRS diligently defended the CIA Annex, Ambassador Stevens was unexpectedly discovered alive by a compassionate group of Libyans who promptly rushed him to a nearby hospital. Despite desperate attempts to resuscitate him, Stevens tragically succumbed to smoke inhalation and passed away in the hospital.

Image via Paramount Pictures

The issue of whether the unnamed CIA Chief in Benghazi gave the order for GRS to "stand down" during their rescue attempt of any survivors from the diplomatic compound is a subject of controversy. The claim that a stand-down order was issued is supported by journalist Mitchell Zuckoff's book. Michael Bay's film also portrays the CIA Chief giving a clear stand-down order. All five surviving members of the six-man GRS team have confirmed the issuance of a stand-down order. Kris Paronto, a member of the CIA Annex security team, stated to Politico that "there is no sensationalism in that: We were told to 'stand down.' Those words were used verbatim — 100 percent."

Despite this, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that there was no intentional delay or obstruction by the Chief of Base or any other party. Former CIA Director David Petraeus, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper all confirm that no one was instructed to stand down. Although the identity of the CIA Chief in Benghazi remains unknown, a CIA memo states that this Chief authorized the GRS rescue operation without instructing them to stand down.

Ultimately, it seems unlikely that a stand-down order would have originated from the upper ranks of the U.S. military or State Department. If that were the case, there is no clear evidence to support it. However, it remains uncertain what exactly the CIA Chief said or if the words "stand down" were used. Michael Bay chose to believe the accounts of the Americans who defended the CIA Annex, while others view this belief as a conspiracy. While there is some evidence in the form of eyewitness testimony suggesting a stand-down order, it is also possible that a simple misunderstanding occurred during the conversation between military personnel and the CIA Chief.

What Critical Air Support Denied in Benghazi?

Image via Paramount Pictures

According to the movie 13 Hours, those defending the CIA Annex in Benghazi were denied crucial air support. The movie portrays a CIA officer requesting air support and suggests that a U.S. military plane in Italy was available for assistance. It also implies that if air support had been provided, the deaths of Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods could have been prevented. However, evidence suggests that no air support was possible, contrary to claims of a stand-down order. A House Armed Services report mentioned by Vox states that the Department of Defense did not have any armed drones or combat-ready aircraft nearby on September 11, the day of the attack. The military planes in Italy were exclusively used for training and were not equipped for combat missions. According to the report, the closest combat plane was in Djibouti, too far away to reach Benghazi in time. Therefore, the movie's depiction of military incompetence resulting in the denial of crucial air support is sensationalized and most likely factually incorrect.

How Accurate Is '13 Hours'?

Image via Paramount Pictures

Despite these two highly contentious issues, 13 Hours is generally considered a relatively accurate film. Michael Bay intentionally prioritized the accounts of the military personnel who defended the CIA Annex in Benghazi, disregarding subsequent investigations and reports. This particular perspective aligns with right-wing narratives that criticize the perceived weakness and incompetence of the Democratic administration during that time. However, it also reflects Bay's tendency to depict events from the perspective of hardworking individuals on the front line, mirroring his approach in films like Pearl Harbor or Armageddon. Bay willingly ventured into controversial territory with 13 Hours, and the controversies surrounding the movie persist to this day.

Editor's P/S

13 Hours is a highly controversial film that has been praised by some and criticized by others. The film's depiction of the Benghazi attack has been called into question by some critics, who argue that it is inaccurate and misleading. Others have defended the film, arguing that it is a fair and accurate portrayal of the events that took place.

As a passionate fan of the film, I believe that it is a powerful and moving portrayal of the Benghazi attack. The film does an excellent job of capturing the chaos and confusion of the attack, and it pays tribute to the bravery of the men who fought to defend the American diplomatic compound.

However, I also believe that the film has some flaws. The film's depiction of the "stand down" order is particularly controversial, and it is clear that the filmmakers took some liberties with the truth in order to create a more dramatic story.

Overall, I believe that 13 Hours is a well-made and entertaining film that is worth watching. However, I also believe that viewers should be aware of the film's flaws and should not take it as a completely accurate account of the Benghazi attack.