I knew it was too good to last.

You don’t have to be familiar with the opus of Kanye West to be aware of his existence. Indeed, when I asked my daughter what he was famous for she gave me one of those withering looks that mixes bewilderment with contempt that only a teen girl can manage.

And I am still no better informed about Mr West’s accomplishments - although apparently he now wishes to be known as Ye, and so in keeping with the spirit of self-definition, Ye he shall be.

At the weekend, Mr Ye posted a series of antisemitic rants on social media and ended up having his Twitter account blocked. Apart from my incredulity that Twitter actually acted to remove an antisemitic post – most of the time it seems to rely on them for business – what struck me most was how this was reported.

Near universally his words were described as antisemitic. Now this might not seem the most noteworthy aspect of this story, given that they were indeed antisemitic. But you hardly need me to tell you that, more often not, even the most blatantly antisemitic statement is usually reported as “allegedly antisemitic”. Write that Jews kill babies to suck their blood and the likelihood is you will be described as having written an apparently or allegedly antisemitic sentence.

So the reaction to Mr Ye’s posts was pleasing in its refusal to mess about with such qualifiers.

But it was, as I say, too good to last.

In the days after the first reports, two main themes have emerged. First – and most ludicrously – that Ye’s words should not be interpreted as antisemitic. Trump supporter Candace Owens told us that, "If you are an honest person, you did not think this tweet was antisemitic. You did not think that he wrote this tweet because he hates or wants to genocide Jewish people. This is not the beginning of a Holocaust."

Candace, may I explain? The bar to something being antisemitic is not that it is the start of a second Holocaust.

It might be helpful if we take a look at the not-starting-a-Holocaust-and-so-honestly-not-antisemitic words of Mr Ye.

At the weekend his Instagram account was suspended after he had accused another rapper, Diddy, of being controlled by Jews: "Ima use you as an example to show the Jewish people that told you to call me that no one can threaten or influence me."

In response, Mr Ye took to Twitter, writing: "I'm a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I'm going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE The funny thing is I actually can't be Anti Semitic because black people are actually Jew also.

"You guys have toyed with me and tried to black ball anyone whoever opposes your agenda."

So, Candace, in all honesty – which words he posted would you not consider antisemitic? I’ve been knocking around this topic for some two decades and – yes, Candace, honestly – don’t think I’ve ever seen a more obviously antisemitic post. Short, that is, of the drinking babies’ blood stuff.

But wait. We’ve been here before, haven’t we? There is always – always! – a get out of jail free card, no matter how unambiguous the words may be.

Ladies and gentlemen: I give you the Mel Gibson defence.

Yup, the latest theme to emerge is that what Ye said doesn’t really count because they are clearly the words of someone who is, to use the technical term, off his trolley.

Gibson has a career-long history of remarks. But every time he comes out with something, his acolytes and tell us that he is ‘troubled’, has ‘mental health issues’ or – infamously after one incident - was pissed as a newt. So it’s not really antisemitism, more a sign that he needs help. We should actually be helping, not pillorying, him.

It didn’t take long for the same drivel to be spouted after Ye’s posts. He is clearly in trouble, he needs help, blah blah blah. I’m waiting to be told we should embrace him and invite him for Friday night dinner.

Here’s the thing. Antisemitism isn’t rational. It’s a global conspiracy theory that is itself evidence of a form of derangement. So when you try to explain away those who make unambiguously antisemitic statements with excuses about mental illness, you are in effect denying the very existence of antisemitism.

And that leads to a whole new discussion.