On closer examination of the links you provided, I did not find any evidence to refute the health information, research and general policies of PCRM; nor it's references, internal or external links. In fact, some of the articles referenced not only the Center for Consumer Freedom, but the National Dairy Council (a peak dairy industry lobby group) and the National Milk Processor Board (MilkPEP) branch of the USDA.
It is worth noting that PCRM has successfully sued the USDA over financial conflicts of interest. They also filed a successful petition against the USDA and two national dairy organizations, through the Federal Trade Commission, forcing the NDC to shut down a 200 million dollar ad campaign due to false weight loss claims. For these and other obvious reasons, these sources aren't much more credible than CCF.
There was also some criticism from a doctor purportedly speaking for the conservative medical trade group, American Medical Association (of which Dr. Neal Barnard is a life time member). However, I did not see a single reference for a clinical study. On the other hand, a single PCRM article contained 38 references, either for clinical studies or articles referring to studies on nutrition and disease.
The point of SW is not to create controversy by inserting unsubstantiated claims, opinions and points of view; but providing clear and factual information. If wealthy and powerful industries such as the processed food, meat & dairy, animal testing and drug industry, cannot refute evidence; they tend to rely on various forms of disinformation, which can include censoring, marginalizing and smears. However, it seems as if PCRM has made it's case very well. Naturally, groups and lobbies such as CCF, the NDC, the USDA and the AMA would tend to "disagree". Furthermore, "Disinformation Campaigns" is a valid description of the activities industry funded front groups such as CCF. It is based on factual information and analysis; some of which is contained in CCF selected campaigns and other links on the page.
See also Talk:Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine & PCRM, sections 3-7.
Accurate & additional information
I have added some more information about the PCRM, as per the SourceWatch 'rules': "SourceWatch is focused on describing the companies, groups, and people attempting to influence public policy--who they are, how they are connected to one another, and who funds them" - therefore, I have included the funding that they have received from PETA. I have also included the criticism they have received from various other groups.
Please check out: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=SourceWatch:Ground_rules