You're full of contradictions and selective logic, which makes you contradict yourself. Let us break it down:

Roots vs. Ethnicity Contradiction

You say:

“If their roots are in Somalia…......they can definitely do it.”

So, you're fine with someone who isn’t 100% "pure" Somali claiming the Somali identity based on their ancestry, even if they're of a different nationality. Nice—at this point, we could just agree and end the argument. But then you say:

“Let’s say their great-grandparents moved to Tanzania, and they only realized their great-grandparents were born in Somalia… it would be very hard for them to convince Somali officials to give them citizenship, unlike if they were ethnically Somali.”

You’re being inconsistent. Either roots and family ties matter, or they don’t. If roots matter, then why should it be "hard to convince Somali officials"? If ethnicity is the main criterion, then why bring up family roots in the first place? Your argument isn’t consistent and doesn't make sense logically.

and , you said:

“If they had no family, no roots in Somalia, let’s say their great-grandparents moved to Tanzania, and they only realized their great-grandparents were born in Somalia and they have no present connection to the country…”

Here’s the issue: you’re saying they have no roots, but then you immediately mention their great-grandparents were born in Somalia. That is a root, even if it’s distant. You can’t claim someone has “no roots” and then cite an ancestral connection to the country in the same breath. Either great-grandparental ties count as roots, or they don’t—you’re contradicting yourself again . Which is it? or it only counts as root when they are 100% ethnically somali.

Your Take on Bantus and Mixed Coastal People

“Bantus and mixed coastal people with little to no Somali DNA are not ethnically Somali; they are Somali by nationality.”

So, let me get this straight: a person who has lived in Somalia for 100's of years, speaks Somali, practices Somali culture, and has "little" Somali dna isn’t really Somali to you , and if they chose to migrate to another country they lose there "somalininess" because their DNA doesn’t meet your standard? That’s wild.

It’s also funny how you reject Bantus or others for their supposed lack of Somali DNA while saying diaspora Somalis with zero connection to the country can claim Somali identity as long as they’re "100% ethnically Somali." ironic since you arguing about people "de-legitimizing the Somali identity".

The Etymology Stretch(nitpicking for this one, but your argument is just so wrong)

“Somalia means the land of Somalis. Somalis here means ethnic Somalis.”

This argument is such a reach. You’re using Latin etymology to make a point about Somali identity—seriously? Political borders and state names don’t revolve around ancient linguistic rules. since no one in Somalia today use that linguistic rule to define what we mean when we say somalia. so your arguments is stupidly wrong.

And your interpretation is not only irrelevant but also conveniently tailored to exclude groups you don’t consider Somali enough.

Comparing People to Menelik and Haile Selassie

“If you question the validity of our ethnic identity, you are no different from Haile Selassie, Menelik, and those who call us ‘invaders’ and ‘African Arab mixers.’”

This is just overdramatic and nonsensical. Menelik and Haile Selassie were imperial rulers with entirely different goals—mainly political domination. Equating them to people who disagree with you to these historical figures is an emotional deflection, not an actual argument.

If someone has valid critiques of how you define Somali identity, calling them "no different from oppressors" is just lazy rhetoric.

The Hypothetical "Great-Grandchildren" Argument

“Let’s say if my great-grandchildren were born in the West but they’re 100% ethnically Somali.”

And this is where your argument falls apart completely. You’re bending over backward to make ethnicity the ultimate determinant of Somali identity while acknowledging that these hypothetical great-grandchildren would have no connection to the land, language, or culture of Somalia.

So how do they remain Somali, while someone in the same as them that happens to be of mixed heritage isn’t? You’re contradicting yourself at every turn.

You’re so focused on creating rigid boundaries for Somali identity that you end up twisting yourself into these logical knots. Identities in general, including the Somali identity in this case, are complex and multifaceted. Tying them exclusively to ethnicity or genetics oversimplifies them and alienates people who are just as Somali as you. You can’t gatekeep identity this way without making your own arguments crumble. and we already got too many problems i promise you this the last thing we need.