I don't really want to argue about what is antisemitism, so I leave it at that. Just note that I find your definitions really weird and concerning.

2. It is de facto. Hate speech, which the government will twist as having Nazi origins.

Didn't say antisemitism isn't hate speech. But hate speech is not illegal per se. Insults are, but only the insults person can press charges. And Volksverhetzung is, which you want to read up.

4. There was an debate on @lemmy.dbzer0.com

That tells me everything I need to know, thanks. /s

5. The second law of NetzDG (don't know what to call it else).

"A second law, which is in an earlier stage, aims to make it easier for users to report illegal content and challenge content decisions by internet platforms."

I agree that they don't request themselves, but they ought to remove and report the content. What content is vague but a lot of things could easily be interpreted as hate speech by the authorities.

Again, it's not about hate speech. A lot of hate speech isn't punishable. NetzDG is about the punishable cases and makes it easier for users to have existing law enforced. I don't know how that makes feddit.org a zionist instance.

"German Penal Code explicitly prohibits hate speech, defined broadly as any expression that denigrates or vilifies individuals based on attributes such as race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation."

That is incomplete. Again, read up on Volksverhetzung. And, if you want, insults (§185 StGB).

6. I don't think so. But this is what other users are claiming about @feddit.org. Hence my post.

Its not my opinion but this was my reasoning on why @feddit.org chose their instance rules and why some people are mad about it.

If you don't agree on feddit.org being a zionist instance and can't even defend that claim/explain others' claims, why even make the effort instead of letting OP explain themselves? Only thing you're doing is open up the doors for strawman arguments. Hence I end the discussion here. I see no point in continuing. Have a nice day.