I'm definitely on the "I HATE anonymous sources" party boat, but the Times' attempt to justify outing that CIA agent can't even be considered a feeble effort.

Hoyt asserts that "...Going in that direction [toward not identifying sources that would be endangered by the article], especially in this age of increasing government secrecy, would leave news organizations hobbled when trying to tell the public about some of the government's most important and controversial actions," but he offers no evidence- not even an anecdote- to support that assertion.

Further, if you read his explanation, you will see that multiple individuals and organizations begged the authors not to publish the agent's name- all offering serious, grave concerns for his safety and well being- and that the Times' reaction was to say, "Well, it's not as bad is it COULD be."

"Maybe his life will be in danger if he ever leaves the country, but hey, he can always just stay in the US!"

"He might be in danger, but no more danger than all those other guys whose cover has been blown by some news organization or the other."

"Yeah, the other guy in the same position that they called to see whether the danger was realistic mentioned death threats and suggested strongly that they not do it, but they figured he was only kidding"

"Because the CIA refused to meet and negotiate the issue, they figured that strongly worded letter citing danger to the lives of this American and his family wasn't all that serious"

This, from the same newspaper that published an article alleging an alleged potential affair between McCain and a lobbyist using almost solely anonymous sources.

Outing Martinez was imprudent, reckless, harmfully stubborn and hugely callous of the Times.

And ya gotta love this part:

But Hayden said that naming Martinez could subject him to harassment or even put him in danger. Keller said, “I had this impression that he was doing it out of respect for Martinez’s and his family’s concerns more than a concern the C.I.A. had.”

Way to twist the intelligence, boys.