Press TV, on Iran, 25 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Qalibaf: Any violation of Iran’s territory will trigger response ‘beyond enemy’s imagination’

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf says Iran is prepared to meet any violation of its territorial integrity with a response beyond its enemy’s imagination, asserting that the country will not be intimidated by threats of all-out war or assassination.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article never says that the speech came a day after President Trump said Washington could strike Iran as soon as Sunday, or that Iran's army said it shot down a US drone over Bandar Abbas that day. Without this the reader hears Qalibaf answering "threats" in general, with no sign of the specific threat he was responding to.

How we know

“We will not be intimidated, and we are ready to deliver a response beyond the enemy’s imagination to any violation of the territorial integrity of our great Iran,” the top legislator said on Sunday, addressing the opening of a parliamentary session.

IRGC warns ‘apocalyptic war’ will reverberate beyond Iran, shape region’s fatehttps://t.co/Dm7XuZAP1d pic.twitter.com/iWfGoBEnii

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) October 24, 2026

“Threats of an all-out war or assassination will not force the Iranian nation to back down from its rights and interests,” he added.

Qalibaf argued that it was the United States that bogged itself down in a quagmire through its miscalculations and unprovoked war against Iran, and now it is the Americans who have to take the necessary steps to extricate themselves.

“Until the Americans change their behavior, abandon their bullying and rapacious ways, and make tangible, concrete, and genuine amends in practice for their violated commitments, none of their claims will carry even the slightest credibility for the Islamic Republic,” he stated. “Iran has nothing new to say.”

According to Qalibaf, the United States has failed to understand the fundamental difference between Iran today and the country under its former Washington-backed monarchical regime, when foreign powers used to exercise considerable influence over the country’s affairs.

“Today, our beloved Iran is not merely free from being a colony of Western and Eastern advisors; it is an independent and powerful regional force that has turned the prospect of the arrogant powers’ and [the forces of] Zionism’s once again dominating this nation’s destiny into a nightmare for good,” he said.

Iran’s top commander says US can only dream of returning to Persian Gulf https://t.co/UyTWlMfwUX

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) October 24, 2026

In his remarks, Qalibaf also marked the anniversary of a historic protest by the late founder of the Islamic Republic, Imam Khomeini, against granting legal immunity from prosecution on Iranian soil to American military personnel and those related to them.

He recalled Imam Khomeini’s denunciation of the former regime, saying the late leader characterized the measure as a testament to the enslavement of the Iranian people and a surrender of an ancient Muslim nation’s independence and dignity in exchange for American dollars.

Iran’s national interests and economic future to American and Israeli interests.

According to the parliament speaker, the significance of Imam Khomeini’s opposition extended beyond the legislation itself, exposing the inseparable connection between the United States and .

He argued that developments in the region and US pressure on Iran through sanctions, assassinations, and military and economic measures reflected the continuation of the same policy of pursuing domination.

Qalibaf, however, reiterated that Iran is no longer a country whose national destiny can be dictated by foreigners.

Read the original article on presstv.ir (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

Press TV reports Parliament Speaker Qalibaf's warning to the United States accurately and attributes his claims to him, mostly in direct quotation. In its own narration it calls the Pahlavi monarchy "the former regime" and paraphrases Israel as "the Israeli regime", and it never tells the reader that the speech came a day after Trump said the US could strike Iran as soon as Sunday. These are minor flaws, and nothing in the report misleads the reader about what Qalibaf said.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “a law passed by the former regime”

    Why this matters
    In its own narration, outside any quotation, Press TV calls Iran's pre-1979 government "the former regime".
    The impression it gives
    The reader takes a verdict on the monarchy's legitimacy as the outlet's neutral description.
    The context
    The same word applied to Iran's current government would be a loaded term in a Western outlet's voice. A plain description such as "the Pahlavi government" or "the monarchy" carries the facts without the verdict.

    How we know

    • Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “Pahlavi” and “monarchy”.

    Show it in the article

    “the Israeli regime”

    Why this matters
    In an indirect paraphrase rather than a direct quotation, Press TV refers to Israel as "the Israeli regime".
    The impression it gives
    The reader cannot tell whether the term is Qalibaf's or the outlet's, so it reads as the outlet's standard name for the state.
    The context
    No direct quotation in the article uses this phrase. Elsewhere the outlet itself writes "American and Israeli interests", which shows a neutral form was available.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“American and Israeli interests”

    Show it in the article

    “Qalibaf noted that Imam Khomeini exposed how the regime would sacrifice”

    Why this matters
    The verbs "noted" and "exposed" present Qalibaf's historical claim about the monarchy as an established fact that he merely pointed out.
    The impression it gives
    The reader comes away thinking it is settled that the monarchy sacrificed Iran's interests to American and Israeli ones, rather than that this is Qalibaf's argument.
    The context
    This is the speaker's interpretation of history. Elsewhere the outlet uses neutral verbs such as "argued" and "said", which mark a claim as his.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“He argued that developments in the region”

    Show it in the article

  2. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says that the speech came a day after President Trump said Washington could strike Iran as soon as Sunday, or that Iran's army said it shot down a US drone over Bandar Abbas that day. Without this the reader hears Qalibaf answering "threats" in general, with no sign of the specific threat he was responding to.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

What it gets right

  • “the top legislator said on Sunday, addressing the opening of a parliamentary session”

    Press TV gives Qalibaf's core warning as a direct quotation and names the speaker, the day and the occasion, so the reader knows exactly whose words these are.

  • “Qalibaf argued that it was the United States”

    Press TV marks the contested claim of an unprovoked US war as Qalibaf's argument rather than stating it in its own voice.

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Press TV

  1. 25 OctIran3.0
  2. 25 OctIran3.0
  3. 25 OctIran’s Baghaei exposes US hypocrisy as Rubio forgets Trump’s ‘pirates’ boast over ship seizures7.3
  4. 25 OctIranian Army intercepts, shoots down US LUCAS drone over Bandar Abbas3.0
  5. 25 Oct‘Nothing will be the same’: Araghchi says Hormuz management will never return to pre-war era6.0

Everything we scored from Press TV