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.