"1. We get to define the un PC words, no one else does"
If by 'we', you mean 'speakers of the English language within the UK', then you're right.
"2. We can't justify the inclusion or exclusion of any one word rationally, nor will we use criteria rigorously"
No, because language does not work 'rationally'- words are arbitrarily ascribed to things. Anyone looking for rational justification for a word's usage will be disappointed.
"3 Nor will we list the words we have decidec are un PC"
Some refused, some provided and handy link. This erroneously assumes that people on this thread are in charge of the English language.
"4 Nor will we defend our decisions when challenged. It is final, we are Right"
Decisions? What decisions? This is an odd thing to say, as you have spent most of the thread refuting your opponents' 'defence' of their arguments.
"5. We get to crap all over people who use the words we think are un PC because we are now In The Right"
If by 'crap all over' you mean 'assume racist leanings in' and by 'words we think are un PC, you mean 'racist/offensive words', then that's pretty accurate.
"6. We can change any word as in or out of PC at any time, and even change its meaning depending on what we infer as it's intent at the time."
Back to point 1 here- if 'we' refers to speakers of the English language (within the UK), then yes. This is how language develops.
"7. You are not allowed to question this arrangement in any way"
But you have. This is very odd. You have questioned it again and again. Who is telling you you are not allowed to do so?
"8. If you do question it you automatically an a X-ist, and a Y -ist and Z -ist by extension."
If you would like to use offensive language, you will offend. If you don't care, that's fine. It doesn't mean you have not offended anyone.
"9. We also get the right to insult anyone who does question this setup, because they deserve it."
You have lumped in a lot of posters who have argued an opposing view to yours with one poster who used the word 'Moron'. This does not weaken anyone else's argument, so it is churlish to dismiss any counter argument for this reason.
"10. If we insult them with an un PC word its OK because we can temporarily remove the offensiveness of the word to suit us. The meaning of the word however still remains offensive if used by a non PC person, even at the same time in the same context."
This makes no sense- the value of an offensive word is in its offensiveness. So to pretend that there are non-offensive offensive words is utterly baffling. Offensive words signify different things though- there are levels and types of offence; many words will lead the audience to make assumptions about the user; that they are misogynistic, disablist, racist, sexist and so on. It is up to the user to decide, once aware of a word's meaning and they can caculate the 'risk', whether to use it or not. The meaning of a word cannot be altered by the person using it unless it is put in context; the idea that a word spoken by me and the same word spoken by you has a different meaning due to our differing opinion is, well, a bit odd.
I wish you hadn't posted your last post, actually Whatme. I disagree with everything you have said on this (and almost any) thread, but you always sounded calm and in control of your argument; save for ignoring any arguments you don't want to address 
. Those points above have made you sound, well- paranoid and a little hysterical. It's a shame.