Not being able to comment on the contents, I'm nevertheless struck by the unusual appearance of the site. Very little in the way of Catholic symbolism (crosses, holy images etc). It looks like just another newsmagazine web site.
Not that that has any bearing on the story at hand.
What they're describing is NOT licit, probably not valid, and certainly not in communion with Rome, however much it may pretend to be.
Couldn't you just as easily argue that ship sailed long ago? The 'abuses' of today are marginal compared with the abuses now taken as normative by those of 'changing church' - true? Would John 23rd, much less Pius X, even recognize the liturgy as being Catholic if they were here to comment, today? What would they say of the lack of devotions? How many new Catholic hospitals have been built, how many new dioceses, how many new Catholic grade schools, high schools, or colleges? and so on. The proclamations of Pius X might be greeted even a blasphemous to the 'changing churchman's ear - yes? Again, I think the complaint is one of certain 'reform' thresholds being violated, as they are month to month, year to year. But that threshold was far too low, to begin with. The time to complain, and oppose, was in the late 60s and early 70s, even up to the early 80s when apparently the present 'EM' rush was promoted. Traditional Catholics might simply say that the institutional church is almost beyond repair, and needs to incorporate priests from the traditionalist orders, almost exclusively, to right itself. But the real solution, as always, is prayer, the supernatural, Providence - God. It is His Church, and we are His. As hard as it is to the ears of 'reformists', Christ is King!