Sorry if I miss anything. You guys exploded when I wasn't looking.
A Theory is an explanatory belief that attempts to state a Fact.
No. A theory is an explanatory belief that can be used to explain phenomenon or make hypothesis, which may or may not be Facts.
Saying Fact > Theory is like saying Tree > Rain Forest. A rain forest is a collection of trees, as well as soil in which trees strive, an environment in which trees an grow, animals that eat fruits and help spread seeds around so that new trees can be found, etc.
When the explanation is In Fact true it is a Fact.
lets try a different tack. 
on the wikipedia link that oldtrees posted, we have the following statement.
A fact (derived from the Latin Factum, see below) is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiabilty, that is whether it can be shown to correspond to experience.
in comparison the test of a statement of theory is falsification, a more rigorous test, because theory must always be improved to resemble truth, while once a fact is verified it is considered true. Thus what you deem to be a lacking or failing in theories that they can be proved false, is actually a strength they have over facts in the search for truth
The statement "Swans are white" can be identified as a statement of fact, or a statement of theory. if taken as a fact, the only requirement is that it be verified that swans are white. while for everyday life this is enough, in science that is not enough. because in science nothing can be proved true, only false. and when stated as a theory, science would look for cases where swans are not white, and indeed there exist swans that are not white, but black.
Thus in the search for truth, a statement of fact will fall short of a statement of theory. because one will be accepted as true, while the other will not and will lead to science that brings about more discoveries and more truth.
People do not make "statements of theory" (describing the theory they claim) in the same manner as they make "statements of facts" (claiming something to be a fact).
Facts are by definition True, however many statements purporting to be fact are not. We also tend to hold lower standards for most statements purporting to be facts. In this manner I would rank the category of claims that something is a fact below general theories in terms of accuracy.
Note: Swans are White would require verification that swans exist, some swans are white AND no non white swan exists. Obviously the statement purporting to be Fact was inaccurate because not all Swans are White.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact
Facts are True. Things that are claimed to be facts are often not. The error is in the claim.
Then we, as fallible human beings, never have facts, by your understanding. We have only claims of facts, which may turn out to be false. The high level of skepticism you show in other discussions must also be applied to "facts."
I would submit that a True Belief would qualify as a Fact despite the believer not having the Knowledge that their belief is a Fact. However you are correct that my level of skepticism would doubt beliefs claimed to be Facts.
@ Everyone
In summary of my position:
A Statement of Fact is a descriptive belief that attempts to state a Fact.
A Theory is an explanatory belief that attempts to state a Fact.
A Scientific Theory is a Theory that meets certain criteria imposed to ensure greater accuracy of the category.
A Fact is something that is True.
Therefore in terms of accuracy the categories are listed: Fact > Scientific Theory > General Theory > Statement of Fact > General Belief
