This is article is biased against Iran. Why is it a "radical track" for Iran to demand it be held to the IAEA's own standards?

Let me just point out what article IV of the NPT says:
-------------
" Article IV

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world."
----------------

It is Bush and Israel and Europe who are the radicals. they are threatening Iran with no evidence of wrong doing, they are breaking the UN Charter by making threats of war (and WWIII even) at the possibility of Iran having the KNOWLEDGE to do nuclear work. This article, like almost all the others in the American media comes to the table with the assumption that Iran is wrong, even though there is absolutely no evidence of that. It is the same garbage "journalism" that lead the USA to attack Iraq without asking serious questions... Pathetic!

This cannot be unrelated to the Putin visit, and that does not bode well.

We shouldn't get carried away by what is, at least on the surface, bad news.

Remember that the decisive consideration is not how Iran's political leadership feels about developing nuclear weapons, but how close the country is to actually being able to do this. We do not at this point have any good reason to think an Iranian bomb is imminent, which means we have time to maneuver to head off a development no one outside Iran really wants to see.

There isn't any question that very high oil prices increase the confidence of the Iranian leadership, and must decrease the leverage of those Iranian political figures who argue that broader engagement with the global economy is key to their country's future. But there is nothing we can do about that, at least not directly or in the immediate future.

High oil prices only help Iran if they are able to sell oil. If we are willing to settle for really high oil prices, in a pinch we can put a stop to that in a number of ways. I don't think we're at that pinch yet.