They do it with the bible, so to me it's a carry over from that. Find a sentence which works, shoehorn it into the text, job done. I agree with those arguing that it is impossible for some of the misquotes not to have been done other than with the deliberate intent to deceive. There's just no way one can hack some of their misquotes without it being deliberate. It could well be a reflection of poor writing and editorial standards, an absolute incompetence which allows deception to be published, but I'd be more inclined to think that it is an organisation operating in a way which reflects its absolute contempt for those reading what it puts out. Few will fact check at the time, and even those do so against strong warnings not to do so. And everyone is aware of the penalties for speaking out about errors. One learns to let things slide into a safe blindspot.