The post on KC Dog Blog about the truth behind dogsbite.org is a must-read. It's a very thoughtful, objective analysis (unlike this blog *grin*).
As commenters mention, it's frightening that a group gets quoted without having any credentials, solely to provide "both sides". How can you justify promoting the opinions of a group with absolutely no credentials, who want to kill animals solely because of appearance?
Dog owners are a visually identifiable group. Does pushing a personal agenda of vengeance qualify dogsbite.org as a hate group?