Steve Jobs passed away- 1955-2011

Share your thoughts and condolences for Steve Jobs. Like and share your thoughts here..

Steven Paul “Steve” Jobs – the Apple and world icon of innovation has passed away after 8 years suffering of cancer.

In mid-2004, Jobs announced to his employees that he had been diagnosed with a cancerous tumor in his pancreas.

The prognosis for pancreatic cancer is usually very poor; Jobs, however, stated that he had a rare, far less aggressive type known as islet cell neuroendocrine tumor. After initially resisting the idea of conventional medical intervention and embarking on a special diet to thwart the disease, Jobs underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy (or "Whipple procedure") in July 2004 that appeared to successfully remove the tumor. Jobs apparently did not require nor receive chemotherapy or radiation therapy.

During Jobs' absence, Timothy D. Cook, head of worldwide sales and operations at Apple, ran the company.

The world mourn for the genius

World and business leaders have been paying tribute to Apple co-founder Steve Jobs, who has died at the age of 56 from pancreatic cancer.

US President Barack Obama and Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev said Mr Jobs had changed the world.

Microsoft's Bill Gates said it had been "an insanely great honour" to work with him. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg remembered his "mentor and friend".

The Twitter microblog site struggled to cope with the traffic of tributes.

Apple itself said Mr Jobs had been "the source of countless innovations that enrich and improve all of our lives" and had made the world "immeasurably better".

Thousands of celebrities and ordinary people went on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to record their tributes and memories of the man behind products such as the iPod, the iPhone, the iPad.

The death of Mr Jobs could create a record for Twitter traffic.

Thousands of people all over the world have also been attending Apple stores to leave flowers, notes, and apples with a bite taken from them to mimic the company's logo.

Apple's leading rivals such as Microsoft, Google, Sony and Samsung all chipped in with glowing tributes

GS Choi, chief executive of Samsung, which is embroiled in a major court battle with Apple on patents, said Mr. Jobs was an "innovative spirit" who "introduced numerous revolutionary changes to the information technology industry".

In his statement, Bill Gates said: "The world rarely sees someone who has had the profound impact Steve has had, the effects of which will be felt for many generations to come. For those of us lucky enough to get to work with him, it's been an insanely great honor."

Mr. Zuckerberg wrote on Facebook: "Steve, thank you for being a mentor and a friend. Thanks for showing that what you build can change the world. I will miss you."

His comments were "liked" by more than 200,000 people within hours.

In his own tweet, Barack Obama wrote: "There may be no greater tribute to Steve's success than the fact that much of the world learned of his passing on a device he invented."

Web users in China have reportedly posted almost 35 million online tributes.

Tim Cook, who was made Apple's CEO after Mr Jobs stood down in August, said his predecessor had left behind "a company that only he could have built, and his spirit will forever be the foundation of Apple".

UK Prime Minister David Cameron said: "Steve Jobs transformed the way we work and play; a creative genius who will be sorely missed."

New York mayor Michael Bloomberg said the US had "lost a genius who will be remembered with Edison and Einstein".

People also gathered outside Mr Jobs' home in California's Silicon Valley to lay floral wreaths, while flags were flown at half mast outside the Apple headquarters in Cupertino, California.

A statement from Mr Jobs' family said they were with him when he died peacefully on Wednesday.

"In his public life, Steve was known as a visionary; in his private life, he cherished his family," they said, requesting privacy and thanking those who had "shared their wishes and prayers" during his final year.

Face of Apple

Mr Jobs built a reputation as a forthright and demanding leader who could take niche technologies - such as the mouse and graphical user interface, using onscreen icons rather than text - and make them popular with the general public.

He introduced the colourful iMac computer, the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad to the world. His death came just a day after Apple unveiled its latest iPhone 4S model.

With a market value estimated at $351bn (£227bn), Apple became the world's most valuable technology company.

More than almost any other business leader, Mr Jobs was indistinguishable from his company, which he co-founded in the 1970s.

As the face of Apple, he represented its dedication to high-end technology and fashionable design.

And inside the company he exerted a level of influence unheard of in most businesses.

In 2004, Mr. Jobs announced that he was suffering from pancreatic cancer. He had a liver transplant five years later.

In January, he took medical leave, before resigning as CEO in August and handing over his duties to Mr. Cook.

In his resignation letter, Mr. Jobs said: "I believe Apple's brightest and most innovative days are ahead of it. And I look forward to watching and contributing to its success in a new role."

However, Mr. Jobs stayed on as Apple's chairman.

Despite his high profile, he remained fiercely protective of his private life.

He married his wife Laurene in 1991, and the couple had three children.

Mr. Jobs also leaves a daughter from a previous relationship, and as an adult he discovered that he had a biological sister, US novelist Mona Simpson.

Continue reading

South China Sea is not China's Sea

By Huy Duong

It would be rather absurd if England were to try to claim sovereignty over most of the English Channel, Iran the Persian Gulf, Thailand the Gulf of Thailand, Vietnam the Gulf of Tonkin, Japan the Sea of Japan, or Mexico the Gulf of Mexico.

But that is exactly what China is trying to do by claiming most of the South China Sea, a body of water about the size of the Mediterranean Sea bordered by nine nations plus Taiwan, and the main gateway between the Pacific and the Indian Ocean.

Although there are long-standing territorial disputes over the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands, the biggest security risk for the South China Sea is not the conflicting claims over these tiny islands and rocks but China's outright claim to this strategically important body of water.

Most international experts on maritime disputes, including even some Chinese ones, regard China's claim to be inconsistent with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). China's claim is represented by the so-called "U-shaped line" or "nine-dashed line" map that depicts a line encircling most of the South China Sea.

This map was first published by the Republic of China in 1948 under the heading "Map of the locations of the South China Sea Islands". The name indicates that it was a map of the islands within the U-shaped line, not a claim to the entire maritime space. At that time international law only allowed a claim of territorial sea up to three nautical miles, beyond which was considered international waters.

For decades, this map has remained obscure. Until now Chinese scholars have disagreed on what the map means and its legal basis. China's own territorial sea declaration in 1958 only claimed 12 nautical miles and declared that international waters separated its mainland and the islands which it claimed. In other words, China's own declaration then affirmed that most of the maritime space within the U-shaped line map was international waters.

With newfound wealth after successful economic reforms launched in the 1980s and more recent rising naval strength, China's territorial ambitions have grown to encompass not just the disputed Paracels and Spratlys but also most of the South China Sea. Consequently, China resurrected the U-shaped line map as if it were a claim to maritime space dating back to 1948, whereas in fact it was a map about the position of islands and by law it could never have been a legitimate claim to maritime space.

In the 1990s, China started to make claims to some oil blocks within the U-shaped line in and near the Nam Con Son Basin between Vietnam and Indonesia. In 2009, China included the U-shaped line map in notes verbales to the United Nations' Commission on the Limit of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) to assert its maritime claim. This was the first time China sent the U-shaped line map to an intergovernmental body.

Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines responded with their own notes verbales to the CLCS to reject China's claim and the U-shaped line map. Vietnam's notes maintained that China's claim as represented by the U-shaped line "has no legal, historical or factual basis, therefore is null and void." Indonesia's note said that the U-shaped line map "clearly lacks international legal basis and is tantamount to upset the UNCLOS 1982." The Philippines' note said that China's claim to most of the South China Sea "would have no basis under international law, specifically UNCLOS".

Instead of being deterred, China is becoming more assertive. In March 2011, two Chinese patrol ships threatened to ram a vessel that was carrying out seismic survey at the Reed Bank on behalf of the Philippines. According to the Philippines, the Reed Bank is not part of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) belonging to the Spratlys.

In May 2011, a Chinese maritime survey ship cut the seismic sensor cable of a Vietnamese survey ship operating in an area closer to Vietnam's continental coast than to the disputed Paracels and Spratlys. In June 2011, Chinese fishing boats deliberately ran across the seismic sensor cable of another Vietnamese survey ship which was also operating in an area closer to Vietnam's continental coast than to the disputed Paracels and Spratlys.

Regarding these incidents, on June 27, the US Senate unanimously passed a resolution in which it "deplores the use of force by naval and maritime security vessels from China in the South China Sea." The resolution also noted that one of the incidents "occurred within 200 nautical miles of Vietnam, an area recognized as its Exclusive Economic Zone".

In August 2011, the Philippines challenged China to take the dispute to the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea. China did not accept the challenge, which the Philippines took to underline the fact that China's claim is weak in law.

In the latest episode in September, China warned India that joint exploration with Vietnam in the latter's Blocks 127 and 128 amounted to a violation of China's sovereignty - despite the fact that these blocks were much closer to Vietnam's continental coasts than to the disputed Paracels and Spratlys.

China justified its position by saying that, "The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea does not entitle any country to extend its exclusive economic zone or continental shelf to the territory of another country." In effect, China is trying to use the "historical claims and rights" argument to negate the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

According to international law, no nation can claim Blocks 127 and 128 as its sovereign territory. Legally speaking, as an area submerged under the sea, these blocks are not "susceptible to sovereignty", i.e., they cannot be claimed as the territory of any country. Therefore, Blocks 127 and 128 can only be maritime space governed by international law. According to international law, in 1947 that area was international waters, and today it is part of Vietnam's EEZ.

Regarding the "historical claims and rights" argument, at the Third Biennial Conference of the Asian Society of International Law in August 2011, the Indonesian Ambassador to Belgium, Luxembourg and the European Union obliquely dismissed it as being "at best ridiculous" as follows, ... the "historic claims of historic waters" is problematic for Asia because Asia is a region rich with ancient kingdoms which were both land and maritime powers. Srivijaya Kingdom which has its capital in Sumatra island in seventh century ruled many parts of Southeast Asia and spanned its control all the way to Madagascar. For Indonesia to claim waters corresponding to its history would be at best ridiculous.

Clearly, if nations were allowed to use the "historical claims and rights" argument to claim vast swathes of the world's oceans and seas at the expense of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - which stipulates that coastal nations have an EEZ of up to 200 nautical miles - it would make a mockery of the Convention. For example, the "historical claims and rights" argument would allow Britain, which "waved the rules and ruled the waves" far more than China ever did, to claim rights over most of the world's oceans and seas.

Without having the courage of conviction to go to an international court, China relies on using its superior hard and soft powers to press its claim against smaller Southeast Asian countries in the area. Against this pressure, Southeast Asian parties to the dispute need to improve their individual and collective strength but they also need support from major powers, such as the US, India, Japan, Russia and European Union.

For their own sake, the major powers must not abandon the South China Sea to be turned into a Chinese lake and Southeast Asian nations to fall into China's orbit. That would be disastrous not only to the Southeast Asian countries but ultimately also to the major powers themselves and for the legal order over the ocean that the international community has tried so hard to establish since the 1980s.

Huy Duong is a freelance writer. His articles on the South China Sea disputes have appeared on Asia Sentinel, the BBC's website, The Diplomat, Manila Times and VietNam Net. He would like to thank Duat Le, Truong Tran, Dang Vu, Nghia Tran and other friends for valuable comments on this article.

(Copyright 2011 Huy Duong.)

Continue reading

2 laws - UNLCOS 200 NMEEZ and "Archipelagic States" to End Spratlys Disputes

The following Countries competing to owned the vast oil and gas resource Spratlys: The Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, China, Taiwan (China), Indonesia, Malaysia.

Written by: Dan We ( Twitter: @Dan_We_)

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW...

The most powerful country – the USA is under the LAW and they governed their states and country UNDER THE LAW

CHINA is NOT ABOVE THE LAW... China govern their people under their communist law

The fueling disputes in the West Philippines Sea (WPS) or also called as South China Sea (SCS) might be the flash point which leads to the never ever wanted 3rd World War. (WWIII)

No one ever wants to have their people die from war and conflicts. The good leader must learn how to respect and be respected. A good leader must know how to lower his pride to avoid tensions. A good leader must learn that there is a doom beyond their unlimited pride and ambition to rule the world by their arms.

China has been so confident to replace the US power but their move is not in the right direction. China could bully small neighbors economically but not by arms because small ants are willing to bite and eat the dragon’s flesh if their colony is destroyed and overtaken. Small ants could be worthless but could weaken the dragons power while another giants will come to the rescue and to end the dragons ambition.

China must first plant a good seeds of trust; seeds of unity, seeds of love and seeds of power and wait that those planted seeds would grow and bear fruits for what they have planted for them to overtake other power. It’s early for china to say they are powerful if the whole countries around them are against their power. Unlike US, China never planted any seeds and wants to reap the fruit of the other peasant.

The bottom-line is china would live alone if they will make the unwanted stupid mistake. Any wrong move of china could ends its power both arm and economy. Any wrong move of china will trigger the world to fight against them lead by the US Power, United Nations and the ASEAN nations.

China must have to think that among top 10 Super powers of the World; they got only 1 friend to fight with the other 8.  2 super powers versus 8 super powers is the doom’s day of China and his 1 ally. Who will take over china’s power if they are in the doom’s day? Korea? Vietnam? Russia? India? Mongolia? USA? or Japan?

China! Look before you leap and think before you talk. You must learn how to grow in a peaceful way. You must learn how to get along with other country’s culture than just yours. And you must follow the 2 laws that would end the disputes of the seas.

2- Laws of the United Nations to end the Spratlys disputes.

The first provision of law applicable to the disputed Spratlys is the law formulated by the United Nations in Jamaica last December 10, 1982. The provision for the Archipelagic States.

(1.)           THE ARCHIPELAGIC STATES

The Philippines and four other states (Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Bahamas) got the approval in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) held in Jamaica last December 10, 1982. They were qualified as archipelagic states.

In various conferences of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Philippines which is composed of 7,107 islands PLUS... is RECOGNIZED AS ARCHIPELAGIC STATES given freedom forming its archipelago that  composed of groups of islands forming a state as a single unit, with the islands and the waters within the baselines as internal waters. By this concept (archipelagic doctrine), an archipelago shall be regarded as a single unit, so that the waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their “breadth and dimensions”, form part of the internal waters of the state, subject to its exclusive sovereignty

The approval of the United Nations for the 5 countries as Archipelagic States must be respected by the world for the 5 countries:

1.      The Philippines

2.      Indonesia

3.      Papua New Guinea

4.      Fiji

5.      Bahamas

The  above mentioned countries could enjoy undisputable sovereignty of the waters and islands around them from the said laws. Waters around their country between and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimension form part of the internal waters of the states and is belong to its sovereignty. This provision of the UNCLOS is very clear that this law could end the disputes of the Spratlys. The United Nations could not formulate again another provision that would opposed the above “Archipelagic State”.

For the Philippines – The Spratlys is considered as the waters around the Philippines between and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimension form part of the internal waters of the states which simply means Spratlys is part of the Philippines sovereignty and the Philippines don’t have any disputable issues between china and other countries who are not classified as “Archipelagic States”.

(2.)          The United Nations Conventions of the law of Sea (UNCLOS) 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone

The 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone is another provision of the law by the UNCLOS that could resolve the Spratlys disputes.

Regardless of what kind of law of china have for its country is not acceptable in the international law would deem that their law is invalid and must be superseded by the United Nations Law that for the particular disputes that would affect many countries around them.

For the following Countries competing to owned the vast oil and gas resource Spratlys:

1.      The Philippines

2.      Brunei

3.      Vietnam

4.      China

5.      Taiwan (China)

6.      Indonesia

7.      Malaysia

The 7 countries mentioned above competing claims have their common grounds which is the UNCLOS 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone. Each country might have to study first if their claim is valid or not.

For the Philippines; 2 provision of laws that would protect them to own the Spratlys exclusively with undisputable sovereignty by the application of the “Archipelagic States” that say the waters around the Philippines between and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimension form part of the internal waters of the states which simply means Spratlys is part of the Philippines sovereignty and the Philippines don’t have any disputable issues between china and other countries who are not classified as “Archipelagic States”.

Secondly the Philippines still subject to enjoy the second provision of laws of the United Nations Conventions Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS) 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone. Since most part of the Spratlys is within 200 Nautical Miles Economic Zone of the Country then Majority stakes for the Spratlys sovereignty is lawful to be granted to the Philippines. “Proximity” the Spratlys is just within Philippines backyard.

The application of the 2 provisions of laws of the United Nations Convention of the Laws of Sea (UNCLOS) the  “Archipelagic States” and the “200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone” means the “Whole Spratlys” is under the Philippines Sovereignty and the Philippines supposed to be must enjoy their undisputed territory in both their main land and the Spratlys.

The Paracels is another disputed islands between Vietnam and China which both of them could benefit the 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone must send the disputes to the United Nations and they will signed an agreement to solve the disputes peacefully. The United Nations also must mediate and implement the law to end the disputes.

WHAT MUST CHINA DO? (AN SO ORDER!)

1.       China must respect Vietnam’s territory and 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone from Vietnam Shore (The Paracel Conflict between China and Vietnam) and vice versa, Vietnam must respect also the China’s 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone.

2.       China must stop disputing with the Philippines as the Philippines is recognized by the United Nations as Archipelagic States which means water and islands  connecting the Philippines regardless of its breadth is belong to the Philippines sovereignty.

3.       China must settle the disputes with Vietnam in the United Nations and respect the UNCLOS 200 Nautical Miles Exclusive Economic Zone.

Continue reading