Neither the UN definition, nor the history of South African Apartheid match Israel though (i.e. you have Arab and Palestinians in Israel who are in all branches of governments and courts, doesn't mean there isn't oppression).

The occupied territories are a part in which policies that were called by reports Apartheid-like. So the statements are different and the first therefore can be read as antisemitic, cause it conflates only the Israeli nation as the apartheid state (ignoring all other colonialism that happens).

The evidence is not just the same, it is more specific (and a much stronger argument could be done) and unlike the first one not wrong per se.