We do not republish articles from Daily Express. Our findings are below, each quoting the words it is about. Read the full article on the outlet's own site.
The Daily Express headline turns Rezaei's conditional warning, that Iran would strike US bases in Europe if the US attacks it, into a 'horror threat' to strike bases in Europe. The headline also calls it a 'WW3 warning' that nobody in the article issues. The outlet says in its own voice that US tanker jets left RAF Mildenhall 'after an Iranian threat', though its own later sentences say the nature of that threat is not known, and it calls Rezaei's warning 'chilling' in its own narration.
Headline goes beyond the article
Serious
“Iran issues horror threat to strike bases in Europe”
Why this matters
The headline says Iran threatens to strike bases in Europe and drops the condition attached to the threat.
The impression it gives
Iran has threatened, outright, to attack Europe.
The context
Rezaei said Iran would strike US bases in Europe only if the US attacks Iran. The body's own quote carries that condition, and other outlets kept it in their headlines.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“If the Americans make a mistake and attack us”
The headline calls Rezaei's words a 'WW3 warning'.
The impression it gives
An Iranian official warned of a third world war.
The context
Nobody quoted in the article mentions a world war. Rezaei spoke of retaliation against US bases if the US attacks Iran. 'WW3' is the outlet's own label.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“any US attack on Iran would trigger retaliation against American military bases”
Iran says it will strike US bases in Europe if the US attacks it again.
States one side's claim as fact
Minor
“American military chiefs moved fuel tanker jets from RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk after an Iranian threat”
Why this matters
In its own voice the outlet says the jets were moved 'after an Iranian threat', presenting the cause of the move as established.
The impression it gives
It is established that Iran made a specific threat against RAF Mildenhall and that this is why the jets were moved.
The context
The article's own later sentences say the nature of the threat is unknown and still under discussion among US officials. The link to the move rests on unnamed reports. Downing Street's spokesman says aircraft move regularly for operational reasons.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“The exact nature of the threat is not known and remains under discussion among US officials”
Elsewhere in the article“according to reports in the US”
Elsewhere in the article“Aircraft and other assets move regularly according to operational requirements”
Uses a loaded word
Minor
“The chilling threat”
Why this matters
In its own narration the outlet calls Rezaei's conditional warning 'chilling', on top of 'horror threat' elsewhere.
The impression it gives
The statement is an alarming act of menace in its own right.
The context
The statement is a warning of retaliation if the US attacks Iran. The outlet's adjectives carry a verdict that the quoted words do not.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“If the Americans make a mistake and attack us”