[Quiller]

can dismiss the notion that the MSM will do any real reporting on the matter

Well, sure. Put yourself in the reporter's position -- you can report the truth as you see it or report it as the terrorists present it to you.

If you report it as you see it, then there's a slim chance it will get exposure in the media.

If you report it as you see it, there's an even slimmer chance you will ever get access to areas where the behind-the-lines action on the terrorist side is happening.

If you report it as you see it, you may even get roughly handled or even "disappeared."

Most "investigative" reporting is done against people who aren't likely to kill the reporters, not against someone who doesn't give two hoots in Hell whether the reporter continues to stave off ambient temperature or not.

[Jameison]

"Well, sure. Put yourself in the reporter's position -- you can report the truth as you see it or report it as the terrorists present it to you. "

That is all assuming the drive-by media are the least bit interested in reporting the truth.
Just think Dan Rather, TANG, and his fraudulent reporting from Vietnam.
An outfit like the BBC is one of the biggest Isreal-hating news outfits on the planet.
Have been for decades.
They don't really need any prompting from Hizbullah to manufacture anti-Israeli propaganda.

[mtbopfuyn]

You left out one scenerio. The reporter could choose the honest option. He could pack his bags and return to the states with evidence of these staged events and report it truthfully and safely on home turf.