Sorry! I'm not trying to, but I'm also not sure how else to interpret them. As I said, I'm willing to believe that papers occasionally slip through the cracks (the arsenic life thing from 2011 could have been caught in review, for example), but the idea that a decent number of papers papers just slide through the peer review process is totally unlike the experience I've had with my own and my friends' and colleagues' papers.
But you've successfully shown how to "write around" the facts to make your point.
I'll choose to interpret your comment as performance art.. and in that case, you nailed it! Well done.