Laird did not hesitate in agreeing with Moorer's recommendation to proceed despite the new developments. Laird was committed and fully understood Nixon's policy and to what extent the President would go to make his point once diplomatic efforts failed or produced insufficient results on a specific issue. Laird's resolve and conviction over the POW/MIA would be

reconfirmed in his eyes because, within an hour of Moorer's departure, Richard Helms arrived to discuss the information obtained from the Hanoi source and also brought additional news concerning the POW issue. The CIA had intercepted recent "traffic" and confirmed that as many as 11 more POWs had died in captivity in addition to those reported on 13 November. Laird knew he must immediately inform the President of these developments. However, exactly what and how he told the President is an issue which is still debatable.

Laird did, in fact, brief Nixon around mid-morning on 20 November, still several hours prior to the scheduled departure time of the raid force. Research indicates that at least four other sources believe that Laird did tell Nixon about all of the new developments and that they both agreed without much discussion that the mission should continue. However, according to Laird (see Appendix B), he denied briefing Nixon that a source from Hanoi two days earlier had indicated there were no POWs at Son Tay. He did admit to informing Nixon about Helm's information concerning the deaths of 11 more POWs. Laird stated that, "Nixon had already approved the mission in July 1970 and authorized its execution on 18 November 1970. I was placed in charge of the mission, responsible to brief the President as updates were required or requested." Laird called Nixon several hours prior to the launching of the force for any last minute Presidential concerns, much as he had always done on previous occasions. As far as Laird was concerned, the decision to execute was final and the new information concerning the POWs, regardless of accuracy, would not change that decision. At this point, apparently the execution of policy was more important than "cluttering" the decision with new information, regardless of its potential impact. Would the President have aborted the raid had he known about the real possibility of no POWs at Son Tay, especially when that information was coming from the Secretary of Defense?

Research indicates, and it is the judgment of this author, that the President would not have aborted the mission in light of this information. Whether or not the President was briefed about the Hanoi source information is irrelevant. After all, the final decision to carry out the raid had been made. In other words, there was no political "smoking gun" (any Presidential "wrong doing" associated with the decision to execute or continue) to be found on this specific issue. However, if the Hanoi source information proved to be true, Laird would take all the blame if the mission turned out to be a total failure. Apparently Laird's decision not to brief Nixon would provide Presidential "plausible deniability" in case the mission met with tragic results. Having established Nixon's policy towards ending the war in Vietnam and what part the raid would play in that policy, let us review the leadership, execution, and reaction to the mission in order to understand the complexity and significance of the Son Tay Raid.