Tehran Times, on Iran, 3 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Qalibaf warns of unpredictable response to

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.3 findings

TEHRAN— Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf has warned that any military miscalculation by the United States would trigger an unpredictable and far-reaching response, stressing that Iran remains fully prepared to defend itself and will not yield to threats or excessive demands. Addressing an open session of Parliament on Tuesday, Qalibaf said Washington’s longstanding hostility toward Iran stemmed from the Iranian people’s determination to preserve their independence and resist foreign domination.

He said Iran’s resilience had left the United States and the Israeli regime at a loss over how to proceed, adding that their repeated attempts to force Iran into submission through threats and military action would fail. Referring to the military strategy determined by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei, Qalibaf said Iran’s Armed Forces were prepared to respond decisively to any potential attack.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article never says that the US struck Iran's Qeshm island overnight before the speech. Washington called the strikes defensive and said they followed an IRGC missile launch at a US aircraft. Without this, a reader of 'any potential attack' takes US military action to be only hypothetical.

How we know

“Our military and strategic response to any miscalculation by the enemy will be unpredictable,” he warned, adding that Iran would not restrict its response to geographical boundaries and would undermine its adversaries’ calculations and their material and non-material assets. Qalibaf said Iran had delivered a firm and rational response to Washington, leaving the responsibility for preventing another war with the US government. He warned that any further strategic miscalculation would confront Washington with a new battlefield and leave it more desperate to find a way out.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article does not explain that Iran's 'firm and rational response' answered a draft US-Iran deal under Qatari mediation. Without this, a reader can take the 'response' as a military one rather than a reply in negotiations.

How we know

He also stressed that national unity and cohesion were Iran’s strongest assets in confronting future threats, describing them as the most effective means of deterrence. He dismissed suggestions of a lack of coordination among Iranian officials, saying the country’s institutions were working together across military, diplomatic and public-service fronts. Turning to domestic concerns, Qalibaf acknowledged the mounting pressure of inflation and price fluctuations on households.

He said inconsistent pricing and inadequate market supervision had created opportunities for profiteering and exploitation of wartime conditions. The speaker also raised concerns over prolonged queues of export, import and transit trucks at several border crossings, particularly in northwestern and southeastern Iran.

Read the original article on tehrantimes.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (3)

The Tehran Times reports Parliament Speaker Qalibaf's warnings to Washington and keeps them attributed to him throughout the body. Its headline calls US action 'aggression' in the outlet's own voice, a word the body never gives to Qalibaf. The article leaves out the overnight US strikes on Qeshm island and the Qatari-mediated talks that give his remarks their meaning.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “US aggression”

    Why this matters
    The headline uses the word 'aggression' for US action as its own description. It is not placed in quotation marks or credited to Qalibaf.
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes it as settled fact that the US is the aggressor, and that Qalibaf's warning answered an act of aggression.
    The context
    The body reports Qalibaf speaking of a US 'miscalculation', not 'aggression'. Other coverage of the same day shows the US calling its Qeshm strikes 'defensive' and Iran contesting that, so the label belongs to a party and should carry attribution.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  2. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says that the US struck Iran's Qeshm island overnight before the speech. Washington called the strikes defensive and said they followed an IRGC missile launch at a US aircraft. Without this, a reader of 'any potential attack' takes US military action to be only hypothetical.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

  3. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article does not explain that Iran's 'firm and rational response' answered a draft US-Iran deal under Qatari mediation. Without this, a reader can take the 'response' as a military one rather than a reply in negotiations.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

What it gets right

  • “"Our military and strategic response to any miscalculation by the enemy will be unpredictable," he warned”

    The article quotes the threat directly and credits it to Qalibaf, so the reader knows whose claim it is.

  • “Qalibaf acknowledged the mounting pressure of inflation and price fluctuations on households”

    The article reports the domestic hardship Qalibaf admitted, not only his warnings abroad.

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Tehran Times

  1. 3 NovUS has failed to achieve its goals against Iran: VP0.0
  2. 3 NovIran asserts control over Strait of Hormuz, outlines vision for regional security0.0
  3. 3 NovThree oil tankers explode and catch fire in Strait of Hormuz: IRGC Navy3.0
  4. 3 NovGharibabadi: Iran ready for any scenario as diplomatic exchanges with US continue3.0
  5. 3 NovBaqaei: US nuclear allegations are a pretext for pressure against Iran0.0

Everything we scored from Tehran Times