I will tell you something, I am not a Creationist, I am a proponent of Intelligent Design and any body who refers to us as Creationists is disingenuous.
No, it's those who claim that 'designer-did-it' is any different from 'god-did-it' who are being disingenuous. There are a number of types of creationists out there and ID Creationists are one of them.
Intelligent Design is a new paradigm and I get it.
If by new, you mean centuries old and still not science ...
But if you truly do 'get it', then let us know. Show the thing is possible, even if only in principle. Without that, why should anyone accept something not shown to be even in principle a possibility.
How is the designer(s) supposed to have worked? How/when/where was design put in place? How was design applied to result in the flagellum? Where can we go to verify that such was even possible, let alone verify that it WAS done?
You see, if we don't know the exact steps that occurred to lead to the flagellum, the current state is 'we don't know'. That is the correct default position. Designer-did-it is NOT a valid default position.
This is what makes you a creationist, like it or not. This attempt to claim this 'designer-of-the-gaps' position beloved of all creationists. Like any of them, you think you can make your special position true by attacking real science rather than trying to find evidence that actually supports your position.
™ Version 4.2