Notes

It would be the Celts and Germanics too, whom the Anglo-Saxons came out of. I believe there were Shemites already inhabiting Europe too, and that's whom the two other groups were dispersed amongst. The original Shemites (and people of Aratta) were Blonde according to Babylonian Scribes. I think Mediterranean's are more of a mixture, but nowhere near as much as most Arabs.
Oh, and Anglo-Saxon Aristocracy is more like Judaeo-Anglo after all this mixing they've done.
The Germanics (or Scythians as they were known back then) were often redheaded according to the Greeks. Blondeness is less recessive than red-headedness.
I don't think the Israelites would have been completely red-headed, but a mixture of hair colours really, the Bible mentions ruddiness in David & Joseph as a special thing.
The descendants of Shem were placed in a hierarchy above the descendants of Japheth and especially Kham, and God must keep his word.

Anyway, if you recognise that Arabs are a complete mixture of all sorts of haplogroups, that rules them out as an actual defined geno-type so to speak, their varied appearances and traits are divergent from the original inhabitants. They were often classed as "Caucasoid" despite being so different in appearance, because we know they are related to us.
So that leaves us trusting the Babylonian Scribes, and it further elucidates Daniel's dreams of the Beasts and Nebuchadnezzar's statue and legacy (the power structure) makes more sense, as the Greeks & Romans are suddenly included in the same genetic group. It explains why the Han/ Mongols aren't mentioned despite having empires of their own.

If Christianity is true (I'd say so) then it makes sense that the ones who have maintained the Bible, and spread Christianity (although not with the correct interpretations) are actually the heirs to promises, carrying both the curses and blessings, but having little to no idea about their true legacy/ identity, and it's not like they re-wrote the Bible to make the Israelites Lactose Tolerant (J3ws are 70%+ intolerant despite being mostly Ashk3nazi btw) or light-skinned/ red-headed/ genetically recessive, since they did not make any widespread claims to be the descendants of Isaac, even the Germans did not make any such claims as a national policy, that I know of. It's usually "Queen Victoria is related to King David"... well, she is descended from Jewish barons, so obviously they'd say that, she's descended from Mohammed too, apparently.

Which people do you have in mind?
Japan? One of the most pagan/ atheistic people? Made up of two very divergent ethnicities (Jomon & Ainu)?
The entirety of Sub-Saharan Africa with all it's divergent tribal peoples from Pygmies to Khoisans and Bantus? Laughable, there is not a single drop of truth to such a claim, and without Europeans they would not even be able to read the Bible, Greek or English, or the even the Hebrew texts, because British Archaeologists and Linguists are the ones who helped resurrect that dead language. Maybe Ethiopians have a bit of Solomon and J3w in them. Collectively, along with Australian Aborigines, they're practically a separate sub-species from the rest of us, considering the genetic & intellectual/ social disparity (we didn't at all descend from them, there is no continuum). It is typical of an African to make such a baseless claim for the sake of their inferiority complex, and then go on to demonise the very people they stole it from.
Palestinians? They could be.
But they are also likely part Canaanite, and part Sub-Saharan, like J3ws.