CBS Interviews Jihadi: Film at 6?

This story was first posted to this blog entry, and I've separated it into its own item here.

I came across this particular story as I was watching CBS Evening News. I know, I'm a glutton for punishment, but there is a good reason to watch. You never know what you're going to get.

CBS ran a story based on Richard Roth interviewing a jihadist, who was busy scurrying around across the Syrian/Iraqi border. He claims to be Lebanese, joined up with a couple of others, ferried $25,000 across the border, and wanted to be a suicide bomber. He describes his suicide bombing as revenge, not an act of faith (no B-52s, so he's using what's at his disposal).

He wanted to be a suicide bomber, but Iraqi handlers in Baghdad told him that he could do more by leading the efforts in Lebanon. In a voice over, Roth claims that Iraq is a training ground for terrorists, well beyond its borders. Of course, this belies the fact that the terrorists were already operating outside Iraq's borders for years.

We're told that the reporter had to maintain the jihadi's anonymity, but why would the journalist accept such a deal? For getting a news scoop about a terrorist's intentions? Someone who alligns himself with terrorists who capture, torture, and behead journalists? I've got serious questions about the story:

1) Reliability - how do we know that this is a legitimate person of interest. Did the journalist verify the contents of the guy's story?

Assuming that this guy's story checks out, that makes him a terrorist and an enemy of the Iraqi people and the US. That leads to point two:
2) Did CBS run the story with the knowledge of the DoD or contacted the DoD in relation to the story?

Related to that question, one has to wonder the following:
3) Did anyone at CBS have any moral qualms about running a story on an terrorist whose religious obligations include killing Americans? By the score.

So, assuming that the terrorist is who he says he is, CBS went ahead and talked to the DoD, and ran the story, where does this story go?

4) By letting this guy run free, how many lives has the journalist put in danger?
5) Why did the DoD, if they were in fact contacted, permit the story to run? Could they take any action to stop the story from running (national security interest)? Did the journalist provide all relevant information to the DoD and US intel agencies to track down this terrorist in order to gather further intel, and save the lives of potential targets?