It's a mid-level infallibility (which is based on the understanding of infallibility PREVIOUS to Vatican I's definition) which is not dogmatic but only a "certainty of faith".  To say that canonizations are infallible without qualifying and explaining that it's a different infallibility than dogma is being untruthful.

As you said:  This has been said many times, but you don't want to believe it.

How could God allow his Vicar on Earth to bind the faithful to universally revere a damned soul and to have His Church pray to and ask the intercession of a damned soul?

Bishop-of-Rome Francis does not refer to himself as "the Vicar of Christ on Earth," or as "the Pope."

I know.  Utterly idiotic.  This merely shows the increasing desperation of R&R.  Now Catholics are required to do an intense study and investigation of the process, whether it was thorough enough.  Of course, this presumes a Magisterial definition of what kind of process would suffice to guarantee infallibility.  Would having 3 theologians study the issue in depth suffice, or would it require 4?  Does it require 6 months of study and reflection or 3 years?  I have never seen a bigger load of codswallop in my entire life.  R&R, you're becoming not only desperate but downright pathetic.

Canonization, therefore, creates a cultus which is universal and obligatory. But in imposing this obligation the pope may, and does, use one of two methods, each constituting a new species of canonization, i.e. formal canonization and equivalent canonization. Formal canonization occurs when the cultus is prescribed as an explicit and definitive decision, after due judicial process and the ceremonies usual in such cases. Equivalent canonization occurs when the pope, omitting the judicial process and the ceremonies, orders some servant of God to be venerated in the Universal Church; this happens when such a saint has been from a remote period the object of veneration, when his heroic virtues (or martyrdom) and miracles are related by reliable historians, and the fame of his miraculous intercession is uninterrupted. Many examples of such canonization are to be found in Benedict XIV; e.g. Saints Romuald, Norbert, Bruno, Peter Nolasco, Raymond Nonnatus, John of Matha, Felix of Valois, Queen Margaret of Scotland, King Stephen of Hungary, Wenceslaus Duke of Bohemia, and Gregory VII. Such instances afford a good proof of the caution with which the Roman Church proceeds in these equivalent canonizations. St. Romuald was not canonized until 439 years after his death, and the honour came to him sooner than to any of the others mentioned. We may add that this equivalent canonization consists usually in the ordering of an Office and Mass by the pope in honour of the saint, and that mere enrollment in the Roman Martyrology does not by any means imply this honour (Benedict XIV, l, c., xliii, no 14).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm

.
At some point in early Church history, all the earliest popes were believed to be saints, but that doesn't mean they were "canonized."
.
The process of canonization developed over the centuries.
.
Read in your missal, in the Canon, most of the saints are mentioned by their first name only, without "St." or "Saint" before the names.
.
It was common practice to refer to saints as "Blessed" and some even as "Venerable." Venerable Bede, for example.
.
In the 13th century (the time of St. Thomas Aquinas) canonization of saints was quite different from what it is today.
.
In fact, canonizations just 100 years ago were quite different from what they are today.