There's one, teensy little problem with that article on the draft: it's referencing bills that were introduced in January 2003 during a session of Congress that ended a good bit ago, and neither of them had any significant "traction" in committee, let alone enough "legs" to make it to the floor of either house of Congress for a general vote as of when the 2003 session of Congress had ended.
Nevermind the fact that both were proposed by Democrats opposed to the Iraq action for the purpose of political grandstanding, and are built on a premise (that certain groups, particularly blacks, are disproprtionally representative in casualty rosters) that isn't all that well backed by actual numbers (the Feb 4, 2003 edition of the Washington Post has an article on the proposal, with numbers of casualties for Vietnam and the first Gulf War, the 2 most recent documented examples of major conflict as of the time of publishing).
Long story short, the odds of the draft being restarted in the US are about those of the sun suddenly going nova in the next 5 minutes.
As for the infowar site, it still amuses me how much value people put in them, simply because it confirms and supports their existing prejudices, facts be damned.