**Yeah well the bottom line is the whole area was a black homeland before the Boers, who purchased African real estate from Jew entrepreneurs who never owned it, turned up sometime in the 17th Century.** The same Boers were not averse to shedding indigenous blood in defense of their illegally acquired properties, whence each new generation of native Africans will continue the fight until the whites are gone, the same thing in the Americas, Australia and New Zealand. The ones who arrived in those places from Europe, China and Asia on the crest of the wave of Jew sponsored colonial expansion, are in a similar predicament now that the Jews have turned against them, the indigenous ppl resent their presence. No less than the Europeans resent the blacks, Chinese and Asians who have turned up on their shores, what is good for the goose is good for the gander take the battle up to the bc's on their own terms, however in the long run whites have no future in Africa any more than blacks have a future in Europe. A strategic withdrawal financed by Jew reparations sounds about right .. all of the Boer bs about "Bantu Invaders" does not ring true in the face of the facts, their claim that the best farming lands in Africa were "unoccupied" when they got there is similarly bs. Seasonal variations meant most of the populations moved their centers from place to place as per Biblical "fallow lands," thus if "squatters" or "settlers" if you want to call them that turn up during the fallow phase it does not make them the owner.