Direct intervention to remove words is not "an
eye for
an eye" at all. It's the same as directly taking back
stolen property when its ownership is traceable.
No, it's blatant vandalism. (You are referring, of course, to your
activities as 195.188.254.82, which, I hasten to add, were done AFTER
your block in blatant violation of at least two other Wikipedia
policies.) Moreover, the overwhelming majority of the words you "took
back" were not your own, which, by your own arguments, places you in a
much more precarious position than it does anyone at Wikipedia.
You have nothing vaguely resembling a legal case, nor a case under
Wikipedia's rules. You agreed to the license independantly of any of the
other BS you keep spewing; even if you were right about everything else,
something you have yet to convince anyone of, it wouldn't change that
fact. I suggest you stop making things up off the top of your head about
what the law and/or Wikipedia policies say, and actually READ them.
You have had your defense in front of the community that you keep
demanding. Not a single person thinks you have a case, and some go so
far as to question your sanity. Why you think getting more people
involved is likely to change that is beyond me.