I agree, but that seems to be a winning strategy on their part. Since it is much easier to concoct and circulate a lie than to refute it, the sheer law of probability gives the spin meisters a tremendous advantage over conscientious researchers trying to subject their statements to rigorous tests, as if they were scientific hypotheses. The only effective way to fight propaganda is ad hominem - i.e. to thoroughly destroy any credibility of the messengers - rather than trying to establish the truth value of their spin.
The correct argument is not "what these guys are saying is not true because x, y or z," but "these guys cannot be trusted, so determining whether they happen to be telling the truth or not is largely irrelevant and a waste of time."
Wojtek