Is the SSPX Position Really Indefensible? Part 2

I'm continuing to read and reflect on the article claiming that the SSPX position is "indefensible." I wrote in part 1 about clandestine ordinations forbidden by Rome but performed by both John Paul II when he was bishop of Krakow and Cardinal Josyf Slipyj, a prisoner of Russia. Rome explicitly forbade the clandestine ordinations during the Cold War battle with Communism. The bishops did it anyway. Sometimes, crisis situations necessitate disobedience. John Paul II never expressed any regret over his deliberate disobedience of the pope's directives and he never suffered any consequences despite the automatic punishments defined in canon law. He is now a canonized saint and Cardinal Slipyj's cause is in progress.

Is the SSPX Position Really "indefensible?" Part 1

Cardinal Wojtyla and Cardinal Slipyj both ordained clandestinely
without permission from the Vatican violating canon law.

I'm currently reading SSPX Indefensible posted by Dom Dalmasso of the Logos Project written by Noah and Wesley Weidig who  were raised in the SSPX. The document is really just a reiteration of points made by Dalmasso, John Salza, ex-32nd degree Mason, Robert Siscoe, and Andrew Bartel, all of whom came out of the SSPX and now attack the SSPX as schismatic and a danger to the faith.