Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

The Deadly School Fire At least eight students have been arrested on suspicion of arson after fire at a boarding school for girls in Kenya killed 16 students and injured 79, police said. The fire broke out in the early hours of Thursday at the Utumishi Girls Academy Senior School in Gilgil, west-central Kenya. Investigation and Arrests On Friday, the Directorate of Criminal Investigation said preliminary investigations had identified eight people as “persons of interest in connection with the planning and execution of the suspected arson attack”. “The eight girls have since been arrested and are currently in police custody,” the statement added. The Aftermath Student Hilda Njeri, who was in one of the dorms most-affected by the fire, told Al Jazeera she was still dealing with everything that happened. “I was badly injured on my leg, and my lower back was badly injured,” Njeri said outside the school on Friday, adding that the principal took the students to hospital and paid all bills for treatment. Government Response Kenyan Education Minister Julius Ogamba told reporters that early investigations found that two teachers had been informed of the students’ alleged plans, but failed to stop them. Ogamba added that the school failed to follow safety rules, citing overcrowding in the dorms and a locked emergency exit. The Kenyan government has disbanded the school board of management and will take appropriate legal and disciplinary action against any staff found to have neglected their duties, he said.

The Surge in Chinese EV Exports China's electric vehicle exports surged 40 percent last month, bolstering its position at the top of the rapidly growing global market, customs data compiled by Bloomberg shows. Chinese EV exports hit 278,081 in April, taking overseas sales since the start of the year to 893,852, according to the data. Global Demand for Chinese EVs Asia imported the most EVs of any region, at 110,613 vehicles, followed by Europe and Latin America with 83,813 and 52,897, respectively. Oceania imported 22,695 Chinese EVs, while North America imported 4,422, according to the data. Brazil experienced the biggest rise in demand among the top 10 export destinations, with imports surging 221 percent to 38,144. South Korea, Germany and Australia also saw sharp increases in demand, with imports rising between 100 percent and 190 percent. The Impact of Trade Restrictions China's growing exports come despite efforts by the United States and Europe to restrict the country's vehicles from their domestic markets. The US applies a 100 percent tariff on Chinese EVs and bans certain Chinese-made software used in connected vehicles. The European Union imposes tariffs as high as 35.3 percent on Chinese EVs. The Future of EV Sales China is by far the largest manufacturer of EVs globally, accounting for about 75 percent of the 22 million vehicles produced in 2025, according to the International Energy Agency. Chinese EV exports hit a record high of 2.5 million in 2025, double the figure of the previous year. Outside of Europe and the US, Chinese models accounted for 55 percent of all EV sales last year, according to the IEA. The IEA estimates that global EV sales will hit 23 million in 2026 to account for nearly 30 percent of all auto sales. Global EV sales surpassed 20 million in 2025, accounting for about a quarter of total auto sales.

Judge Halts Implementation of Trump's Controversial FundA United States federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump's nearly $1.8 billion "anti-weaponisation fund" to compensate victims of alleged government "lawfare." On Friday, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia blocked the Trump administration from "taking any further action" to set up or operate the fund while she hears legal arguments. The judge, who was nominated to the bench by President Bill Clinton, scheduled a June 12 hearing about whether to extend the order blocking payouts.The Legal Battle Over the Fund's CreationThe Department of Justice announced the fund last week as part of an agreement to settle a lawsuit brought on behalf of Donald Trump, in his personal capacity, against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). He had initially sought $10 billion in damages, stemming from allegations that Charles Edward Littlejohn, a former government contractor, leaked his private tax records to journalists. Though Littlejohn was not an IRS employee, Trump had argued that the tax agency should nevertheless be held accountable for the contractor's actions.The lawsuit and its settlement have raised concerns about conflicts of interest within Trump's government, as the president was suing an agency under his oversight, represented by lawyers in his administration.Financial Implications of the Blocked FundThe proposed $1.8 billion fund would have been overseen by a five-member commission which would release money to applicants who can show that they were victims of "lawfare" and "weaponisation," terms Trump and his allies have used to describe investigations and criminal cases against them. The Justice Department has yet to form the commission, so there has been no money paid out yet or claims accepted.Partisan Concerns and Multiple Legal ChallengesFriday's ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by Democracy Forward, an advocacy group representing those who believe they would be perceived "by the Trump-Vance administration as ideological or political opponents." Among the group is a former assistant US attorney, Andrew Floyd, who served as a prosecutor on cases related to the riots on January 6, 2021, when Trump supporters stormed the Capitol.The suit claimed that the fund is a partisan tool designed to award payouts to Trump supporters and not those who are seen as adversarial to the president. Floyd's lawsuit is not the only legal challenge to the "anti-weaponisation fund". There are at least two other complaints. One was brought by former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges, who alleged that Trump created a "taxpayer-funded slush fund to finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name." Meanwhile, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) also filed a lawsuit in Washington to block the fund. Both cases are being processed in federal courts in Washington, DC.Political Fallout and Eligibility QuestionsThe fund spurred a backlash, even from some lawmakers in Trump's Republican Party. Many expressed anger that rioters who attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021, would receive taxpayer-funded payouts. During a congressional hearing earlier this month, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche did not rule out the possibility that January 6 participants could be eligible, even if they attacked police.Nearly 1,600 people were charged with federal crimes after the January 6 riot. More than 1,200 were convicted and sentenced before Trump handed out pardons, commuted prison sentences, and ordered the dismissal of every pending January 6 criminal case last year. Questions have also arisen over whether public figures Trump targeted with investigations and criminal charges might also be eligible for payouts under the "anti-weaponisation" fund.Future Outlook for the Anti-Weaponisation FundThe fund comes amid reports this week that the Department of Justice is launching an investigation into E Jean Carroll, the writer who accused Trump of sexual assault. The Justice Department has also launched investigations into Trump's perceived political opponents, in some cases seemingly at the president's request. Last September, for instance, Trump posted on social media a message directed at then-Attorney General Pam Bondi, appearing to pressure her to file criminal charges against critics like former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.Comey was subsequently charged with lying to Congress, while James faced an indictment on mortgage fraud. Both cases were ultimately dismissed, but the Justice Department has since filed new charges against Comey, alleging he threatened the president with a message written in seashells. Comey and James have denied the charges against them, arguing that the cases are evidence of Trump using the power of the government for personal aims. In addition, the Justice Department launched an investigation into former Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, as Trump pressured the then-head of the central bank to lower interest rates. That investigation was ultimately dropped as well.

Escalation of Ground OperationsReports indicate a significant military escalation, with Israeli forces executing what is described as the largest advance into Lebanese territory in years. This development suggests a departure from previous tactical patterns, moving toward a more substantial and sustained ground presence.Strategic Implications for the RegionThe scale of this advance carries profound geopolitical weight. It signals a potential shift in the strategic calculus of the conflict, possibly aiming to alter the tactical landscape or secure specific areas that have previously been off-limits or lightly contested.Forecast for Regional StabilityGiven the magnitude of the operation, the risk of broader regional spillover increases. This advance will likely complicate diplomatic efforts and heighten tensions across the Middle East, requiring close monitoring of the situation's trajectory.

The Concept of the Bazaar The Bazaar of Return in Aida Refugee Camp is a unique initiative that seeks to bring a sense of normalcy and economic opportunity to the lives of refugees. Background of Aida Refugee Camp Aida Refugee Camp, located in the Bethlehem area of the West Bank, is one of the many refugee camps in Palestine that houses thousands of refugees who have been displaced from their homes. The Impact of the Bazaar The bazaar provides a platform for refugees to sell their goods and services. It helps to stimulate the local economy within the camp. The initiative fosters a sense of community and cooperation among the refugees. The Future of the Bazaar The long-term impact of the Bazaar of Return on the refugees and the camp's community remains to be seen, but initial reports suggest positive outcomes.

Colombian Voters Head to Polls in First Round of Presidential RacePolls opened across the country for the inaugural round of Colombia’s presidential election, featuring a left‑wing lawmaker, an independent businessman and a right‑wing senator vying to succeed President Gustavo Petro. A heavy security presence and a ban on public alcohol sales aim to keep tensions low. Poll Numbers and Candidate StandingsIvan Cepeda (government‑aligned senator) – 33.4% in the latest CNC poll, currently the frontrunner.Abelardo De La Espriella (businessman) – second place, campaigning on hard‑line security and megaprison projects.Paloma Valencia (senator backed by former President Alvaro Uribe) – third, would become Colombia’s first female president if elected.Fourteen candidates in total are contesting the presidency. If no one surpasses the 50% threshold, the top two will face a runoff on June 21. Implications for Colombia’s Political Landscape and SecurityThe result will gauge the durability of Petro’s left‑wing legacy, including his “Total Peace” negotiations with armed groups. A Cepeda victory could extend Petro’s social‑reform agenda, while a win for De La Espriella or Valencia would likely shift policy toward a tougher security stance, echoing approaches seen in El Salvador.Violence remains a concern; last year candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay was assassinated, underscoring the persistent threat from paramilitaries, drug cartels and rebel factions. What the First Round Results Could Mean for a Run‑offShould the vote fall short of the 50% mark, a June runoff will force the left‑wing and right‑wing blocs to consolidate around a single contender, potentially reshaping alliances. Analysts warn that a fragmented right could coalesce behind a hard‑line candidate, while the left may need to rally behind Cepeda to preserve Petro’s reforms.

The Lead: Iran's Internet Partially Restored Tehran, Iran – Authorities in Iran have reinstated some internet access three months after taking the country offline at the start of the war with the United States and Israel, but restrictions remain in place for most people. The Iranian government said last week that it had started a process to bring internet access back to a pre-war level, which was already very restricted as Iran was at the time still coming off an earlier 20-day shutdown imposed during deadly nationwide protests in January. The World's Longest Internet Blackout Last week's move ended more than 2,000 hours of near-total internet shutdown in the country of 90 million people, the longest-ever nationwide blackout in the world. But according to numerous user reports, local media accounts and expert analysis, Iranians' free access to the global internet is far from restored. Restricted Access and Blocked Services Access to millions of web pages remains blocked by the state, and almost all global services and apps such as YouTube, Instagram, Telegram, WhatsApp, Facebook and Waze are closed off and are not under consideration for reinstatement. Mobile, wireless and landline connections are slow and patchy, to varying degrees, while many local applications and services regularly malfunction or fail to load. The Black Market for Internet Access Most people are forced into a black market for access to the internet, which has proven lucrative for those selling virtual private networks (VPNs) or other circumvention methods, often through affiliations with the state. Those connections have now become cheaper after the authorities restored some internet bandwidth, but demand for VPNs has skyrocketed, and people remain exposed to scammers and malware while navigating the market. The Architecture of Filtering Meanwhile, even after the partial reopening, Iranian authorities continue to impose several complex layers of restrictions that have effectively turned full internet access into a privilege that very few people authorised by the state can enjoy. Many data centres have yet to be fully brought back online, and some internet protocols like IPv6 and HTTP/3 are blocked, while others like UDP are actively disrupted by the authorities, local media reported. Political Conflict Over Internet Policy That has prompted more criticism against Iran's relatively moderate President Masoud Pezeshkian, who campaigned against hardliners, in part, on reopening the internet. The Sazandegi reformist newspaper criticised the government over the "belated opening" in an op-ed on Saturday while the state-linked KhabarOnline news site wrote that the "Internet's technical infrastructure is the victim of the new architecture of filtering". The Tiered-Access Internet System Authorities have also failed to elaborate on what exactly they plan to do with the tiered-access internet system that they began expanding during the war. As part of the system, Iranians get varying degrees of access – or no access at all – to the global internet based on their profession and other classifications made by the state. To implement the scheme, a so-called "Internet Pro" scheme was introduced, which offers slightly less restricted access for about three times the price of a regular, more restricted internet package. Frustration and Limited Normalcy Still, more people have been able to get back on social media, where they have posted more videos from the war, including one that showed a new view as dozens of missiles rained down on the headquarters of Iran's supreme leader in downtown Tehran on February 28. Others are sharing war experiences, including where they were and how they felt when the first bombs hit the capital. But that hasn't alleviated the frustrations for many. "What we have right now is not the internet," said a Tehran resident, who spoke to Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity. "It's a return to the previous half-closed condition that is now being sold as an achievement."

On 31 May 2026, Israeli air power targeted Tyre in southern Lebanon, leaving the city reeling from extensive destruction and loss of life. The strike marks one of the most severe incursions into Lebanese territory in recent years, prompting urgent calls for restraint from regional actors. Intense Israeli Airstrikes Hit Tyre, Lebanon According to local authorities and eyewitnesses, multiple missiles struck residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, and a coastal facility in Tyre. The operation was described by Israeli officials as a response to cross‑border attacks, though the precise military objectives were not disclosed. Casualties and Material Damage Reported Fatalities: Initial reports indicate dozens of civilians killed, with numbers expected to rise as rescue efforts continue. Injuries: Hundreds more are reported injured, many requiring urgent medical attention. Infrastructure: Residential blocks, a market area, and parts of the port suffered severe structural damage. Displacement: Thousands of residents have been forced to seek temporary shelter in nearby towns and UN facilities. Regional Implications for Israeli‑Lebanese Relations The strike threatens to destabilise an already fragile cease‑fire that has held since the 2020 border agreement. Lebanese political factions have condemned the attack as a violation of sovereignty, while Hezbollah has warned of a proportional response. International mediators, including the United Nations and the United States, have urged both sides to de‑escalate to prevent a broader conflict. Possible Trajectories for the Conflict Analysts see three short‑term scenarios: Diplomatic containment: Regional powers press for an immediate cease‑fire, leading to limited humanitarian aid and a return to the status quo. Escalation of hostilities: Retaliatory strikes by Lebanese militias could trigger a cycle of attacks across the border. International intervention: Heightened pressure from the UN could result in a monitoring mission to enforce a buffer zone. How the situation unfolds will depend on the willingness of both governments to engage in dialogue and the response of external actors seeking to prevent a wider Middle‑East flare‑up.

Game 7 Recap: Spurs Edge Thunder 111‑103 The Western Conference finals culminated in a dramatic Game 7 where the San Antonio Spurs survived a late foul on Victor Wembanyama and a decisive block by Luke Kornet to clinch a 111‑103 victory over the Oklahoma City Thunder. The win sends the Spurs to the NBA Finals for the first time since 2024. Key Moments That Shifted Momentum Wembanyama’s fifth foul in the fourth quarter forced him to sit, removing the Spurs’ primary interior presence. Luke Kornet’s chase‑down block on Isaiah Hartenstein sparked a quick Spurs run, extending the lead to eight points. Shai Gilgeous‑Alexander scored 35 of the Thunder’s 31 points from starters, but the bench contributed only 14 fourth‑quarter points. The Spurs’ bench outscored the Thunder’s starters for most of the series, a trend that proved decisive in Game 7. Statistical Snapshot of the Deciding Game Final Score: Spurs 111, Thunder 103 Victor Wembanyama: 12 points, 7 rebounds, fouled out in the fourth quarter. Shai Gilgeous‑Alexander: 35 points (team‑high), 5 assists. Luke Kornet: 8 points, 4 rebounds, 1 block (crucial chase‑down). Spurs Bench: 38 points combined, highlighted by Keldon Johnson (two threes) and Julian Champagnie (6‑of‑10 shooting). Thunder Bench: 14 fourth‑quarter points, limited impact overall. What the Upset Means for the NBA Landscape The Thunder’s early‑season dominance (24‑1 start) made them favorites, but the series exposed a reliance on Gilgeous‑Alexander and a bench that could be neutralized when Wembanyama rested. The Spurs demonstrated depth and resilience, reinforcing the notion that playoff success hinges on contributions beyond star players. Fan sentiment toward the Thunder’s “unpopular” style of drawing fouls may intensify, while the Spurs’ narrative shifts from underdog to legitimate championship contender. Looking Ahead: Spurs vs Knicks in the Finals Next up, the Spurs will face a rested New York Knicks team that entered the playoffs on an 11‑game winning streak. The Knicks’ balanced roster and recent momentum pose a fresh challenge, but the Spurs’ experience in Game 7 and their bench firepower give them a credible shot at the title. Meanwhile, the Thunder are expected to regroup, address depth concerns, and return stronger next season.