The Problem is that the Neo-Cath's declare it [Vatican II] as if it invoked the Extraordinary Magisterium, which it of course never did.
Just thought I'd point that out.
I'd like to point out that if it is a valid Catholic Council, then, even if it did not invoke the Extraordinary Magisterium, it is still a part of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium which is also protected by infallibility.
Actually you are mistaken, I explained this in another thread, the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium is that which was taught by Jesus and the Apostles, when people say that something "PARTICIPATES" in the Ordinary Magisterium, they mean that it can be used to prove that something is a part of the Ordinary Magisterium. Since to prove that something is part of the Ordinary Magisterium one must prove that it was always believed, thus, they look at everything from the Authentic Magisterium and see if there is a continuity.
But nothing can be added to the Ordinary Magisterium, Dogma's cannot be created, they can be defined if they already exist however.
So how do you explain "Pope" Paul VI solemnly closing off all documents with this?
“Each and every one of the things set forth in this Decree has won the consent of the fathers. We, too, by the Apostolic Authority conferred on us by Christ, join with the venerable fathers in approving, decreeing, and establishing these things in the Holy Spirit
, and we direct that what has thus been enacted in synod [council] be published to God’s glory… I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church.”
Let us now examine what Pope Pius IX teaches with regards to infallibility:Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Session 4, Chap. 4
“… the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is,  WHEN CARRYING OUT THE DUTY OF THE PASTOR AND TEACHER OF ALL CHRISTIANS  IN ACCORD WITH HIS SUPREME APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY  HE EXPLAINS A DOCTRINE OF FAITH OR MORALS TO BE HELD BY THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH
, through the divine assistance promised him in blessed Peter, operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His Church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable. But if anyone presumes to contradict this definition of Ours, which may God forbid: let him be anathema
Paul VI intended for Vatican II to be infallible. All the evidence for infallibility, provided that he is a true Pope (which he was not), is plainly there for all to see.
Another thing you should take note of is this lovely nugget of Paul VI:Paul VI, “Papal” Brief declaring Council Closed, December 8, 1965
“At last all which regards the holy Ecumenical Council has, with the help of God, been accomplished and ALL THE CONSTITUTIONS, DECREES, DECLARATIONS, AND VOTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE DELIBERATION OF THE SYNOD AND PROMULGATED BY US
[/u]. Therefore, we decided to close for all intents and purposes, WITH OUR APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY
[/u], this same Ecumenical Council called by our predecessor, Pope John XXIII, which opened October 11, 1962, and which was continued by us after his death. WE DECIDE MOREOVER THAT ALL THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED SYNODALLY IS TO BE RELIGIOUSLY OBSERVED BY ALL THE FAITHFUL
[/u], for the glory of God and the dignity of the Church… WE HAVE APPROVED AND ESTABLISHED THESE THINGS, DECREEING THAT THE PRESENT LETTERS ARE AND REMAIN STABLE AND VALID, AND ARE TO HAVE LEGAL EFFECTIVENESS
[/u], so that they be disseminated and obtain full and complete effect, and so that they may be fully convalidated by those whom they concern or may concern now and in the future; and so that, as it be judged and described, ALL EFFORTS CONTRARY TO THESE THINGS BY WHOEVER OR WHATEVER AUTHORITY, KNOWINGLY OR IN IGNORANCE, BE INVALID AND WORTHLESS FROM NOW ON
[/u]. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, under the [seal of the] ring of the fisherman, December 8… the year 1965, the third year of our Pontificate.”
It is simply mythological for anyone to assert that Paul VI did not intend for Vatican II to be infallible.
I'm sure you're already familiar with Vatican II's teachings of collegiality, subsistence, religious liberty and those outside the Church which Vatican II "defined".