The sacrifice of Czechoslovakia
The treacherous sacrifice of Czechoslovakia to Germany is one of the least well understood episodes leading to the tragedy of World War lI. Conventional history associates the Czech crisis with Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement at Munich. The story we were taught in school was that the British government agreed to partition Czechoslovakia only as a desperate measure to avoid a greater European war. This view is based on the idea that Germany was already an overwhelming military power that could easily crush Czechoslovakia’s weak defenses. However, this idea is patently false. In late 1938 Czechoslovakia did in fact capitulate without resistance, but this was not because her defenses were weak. Rather, Czechoslovakia’s government was paralyzed and sedated as a result of the treacherous scheming of Britain’s secret diplomacy.

The beginnings of the Czech crisis
Created in 1919, Czechoslovakia was the most prosperous, most democratic, most powerful and best administered of the states that emerged from the Habsburg Empire. Situated along its northwest frontier with Germany, the Sudeten region was the most industrialized part of the country and had a majority German population. Although Czechoslovakia instituted equitable treatment for all of its minorities, in the 1930s, Sudeten Germans began to press for greater political power and autonomy within Czechoslovakia. They established their own Nazi party and with funding from Berlin their relentless agitation and propaganda became a destabilizing factor for the nation.


In 1934 the Czech government finally banned the party, but under Konrad Henlein’s leadership, they merely changed the party’s name to Sudeten German Party and continued to consolidate influence and power. Henlein coordinated his party’s agenda with Hitler and their strategy was to keep pressing the Czech government for ever greater concessions which escalated the crisis to a boiling point in1938.

The school curriculum vs. the truth

Conventional history holds that Britain only became involved in this crisis in order to prevent a greater war from erupting. The Wikipedia entry says that, “Germany had started a low-intensity undeclared war on Czechoslovakia on 17 September 1938. In reaction, the United Kingdom and France on 20 September formally asked Czechoslovakia to cede its territory to Germany…” That pretty much sums up history as it is still being taught in schools everywhere. The truth is very different: as early as March 1938 and until the very end, British representatives took a very active role in the negotiations between the Germans and the Czech government.

Behind the false cloak of impartiality, the British representatives consistently bolstered German demands and pressured the Czechs to yield. The Czech government responded by offering substantial concessions and formulating a plan for the minorities that included economic benefits, cultural and administrative autonomy and even political federalism. This was however brushed aside by the German and British counterparts as inadequate. Then, on 24 April 1938, Henlein formulated the extreme “Karlsbad Demands.” After months of torturous negotiations, and under severe pressure from Britain, in September 1938 the Czech government yielded on most of these demands. But at that point, rather than declaring victory and accepting a settlement, Henlein abruptly broke off the negotiations and fled to Germany.

The balance of military power
History regards Chamberlain’s 1938 appeasement of Hitler as an ill-advised and cowardly policy, but ultimately a justifiable, or at least well-intentioned bid to prevent a greater European war. The Czech situation was invariably presented as a lost cause since the overwhelming power of the German Wehrmacht could easily crush Czechoslovakia’s weak defenses. But the ideas that the Germans had a military advantage and that Czech’s security was weak were both fabrications of a sustained propaganda campaign, which was orchestrated by the British media and government representatives to mislead the British and European public.

To be sure, Germany had been building up its military power since the early 1930s, but in 1938 it was still no match for Czech defenses: the Germans had 35 infantry divisions and only 4 motorized divisions, none of them fully manned or equipped. Of these, only 22 partially trained divisions were stationed near the Czech frontier. At the same time, Czechoslovakia had 34 well equipped divisions and was able to mobilize and arm fully 1,000,000 troops. While all of Germany’s tanks were below 10 tons (except for a handful of Mark III 18-ton tanks) and armed with 37-mm guns, the Czech army had hundreds of 38-ton tanks armed with 75-mm cannons.


Moreover Czech army was better trained, had very high morale and had built powerful fortifications along its borders. In terms of quality, armaments and fortifications, the Czech army was known to be the best in Europe and was superior to German army in every way except for air support. On September 3rd 1938 the British military attaché in Prague wrote a cable to London, stating: “There are no shortcomings in the Czech army, as far as I have been able to observe…” In addition, Czech security was supported by strategic alliances with France and the Soviet Union both of whom were at that time very keen on holding Germany in check and both of whom were significantly superior to Germany in terms of military strength



..

Turning TechCamp Kyiv Into a Sustainable Movement

9.(U) TechCamp Kyiv was not just a two-day event. It was also an opportunity to bring together civil society
leaders from Ukraine and Belarus connecting them with each other while building bridges to U.S. technology
experts. Our follow-up mission will be to transform TechCamp into a sustainable movement that brings civil
society together with the technology that they need. Embassy Kyiv has already reached beyond the technology

and civil society sectors by inviting private corporations and philanthropic foundations to interact with
participants at TechCamp and share information about the resources that they have available for
NG0s. Representatives from Microsoft Ukraine, Intel Ukraine Microelectronics, Coca Cola, the Pinchuk
Foundation, Hot Source LLC, Softjourn Inc, Soft-Rating Consult, WorldAPP Inc, and MediaNext attended
parts of TechCamp Kyiv. Microsoft, in particular, was very generous in their support of civil society
organizations offering free software and interacting with TechCamp participants via social media platforms.

10. (U) Embassy Kyiv also conducted follow-on events in order to put the expertise of visiting U.S. technology
experts to use in order to expand our audience beyond the 100 civil society leaders that we were able to invite
to Kyiv. Thanks to IREX' Bibliomist program which offered free use of their technology training centers in the
cities of Donetsk and Kharkiv, TechCamp trainers were able to provide hands-on training for 40 additional
NGO activists and librarians the following weekend. Three TechCamp trainers joined us "on the road" to

share their ideas on using online games for social causes; made presentations on FrontlineSMS as a way to
conduct two-way communication without the use of an intemet connection; and discussed new advocacy
techniques for expanding the impact and reach of each participant's program and message.

..

12. (U) Embassy Kyiv plans to use these new technologies and social media to further the development of
NGOs and promote sustainability. We also plan to host an event in Kyiv in three to six months where civil
society organizers can come together to share their best practices, success stories and progress working on the
proposals that they developed at TechCamp. We are also in contact with Microsoft Ukraine about this

proposed event and hope to involve other private sector partners. We also plan to bring in U.S. technology
experts in order to share their expertise, specifically pertaining to the funding and implementation of new
projects.

Vera Sharav is a public advocate for human rights is the founder and president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP). As a Holocaust survivor she has previous first-hand experience of totalitarian regimes.

During her testimony given on Day 6 of the Grand Jury Proceedings her statement included::

“As we know, honesty is nowhere to be found within the corporate dominated government and public health agencies. So, for two years, we’ve all been subjected to the psychological weapons that the Nazis use to maintain a state of anxiety.

“The horrific scenes of police in black uniforms brutally attacking demonstrators in European cities, in Ottawa, in Australia, and in Israel. These scenes are absolute painful reminders of the Holocaust. The objective under the Nazis, and now, is actually exactly the same. It is to gain control over people’s lives by conditioning them to obey government directives no matter what.

“Eugenics was crafted and appeals to the elite segments of society. But it also appeals to the corporate oligarchs and selected government officials, and that’s more important.

“The British eugenicists provided the theoretical foundation which has then been used to justify social and economic inequality, to legitimise discrimination and apartheid, as well as violence against dissenters. But it was the American robber barons who provided the financial, the practical, means that set in motion public policies and population control legislation.

“In 1915, a joint eugenics venture was brokered by John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Alexander Graham Bell, who invented the telephone, and Mrs. E. H. Harriman, mother of the future statesman Avril Harriman.

“They funded a massive lobbying campaign for the enactment of laws to sterilise those whom they deemed unfit. Sterilisation laws were first enacted in 28 States. In the United States, their objective was to sterilise 10% of the American population. That was 15 million Americans. This was to be accomplished under the guise of improving public health and the human race.

“US sterilisation laws served as, you know, the model for the Nazi racial hygiene laws.”

Below is the video of Sharav’s testimony and the transcript.

Grand Jury - Day 6 Part 5 0f 5 - Eugenics and Outlook - Vera Sharav - AHRP Founder, Holocaust surv.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/EhVKshU15PK4/