That's really what you want to hang your hat on? Let me guess... you want to get technical now? I don't really care what the details are, it doesn't detract from my main point. I'm going off memory from something I learned in college. Looking it up, Ashkenazi Jews were 3% at one point, but are now the dominant group at 75%, so that's wrong. How does that take away from my point? Oh, that's right... it doesn't. I retract that statement. As to the other bolded parts, do you ever get tired of being wrong?

I don't know what the exact percentage of their blood traces back to the middle east, but it's very, very small. Here's an article that discovers that... wait for it... they are basically European:

https://www.livescience.com/40247-ashken...genes.html

They found that 40% of the Ashkenazi's Middle Eastern heritage is traceable to 4 founding members. When tracing the maternal lineages of this group of people, 80% of them came from Europe. So, even though they do have some DNA that harkens back to their Middle Eastern roots, it's from a very small group of men and makes up a only a small percentage of their total genes.

Here's an interesting quote: "The genetics suggest many of the founding Ashkenazi women were actually converts from local European populations. "The simplest explanation was that it was mainly women who converted and they married with men who'd come from the Near East," Richards told LiveScience. Another possibility is that Jews actively converted both men and women among local populations at this time, although researchers would need more detailed study of paternal lineages to test that hypothesis, Richards said."

Let me put it another way: You're not picking one out of a lineup if there in there with other Americans with European ancestry.

---