I was able to find Dr. Phillips' classic on magnetic monopoles, subquarks and bosons:
http://www.smphillips.8m.com/pdfs/ESP_of_Quarks.pdf
A rigorous and extraordinary demonstration that subquarks = magnetic monopoles.
http://www.smphillips.8m.com/news.html
An in-depth look at the most recent discoveries in the field of quantum mechanics which DO PROVE the correctness of the subquark ether model.
The aforementioned theory of subquark strings, while interesting, has a fundamental problem. You see, this is really a presentation of a quantum theory of gravity using string theory. The problem is that this description departs from what string theory actually says. In string theory, the strings themselves are much much smaller than your links depict.
The works you cite posit strings to be of a size on order with nucleons themselves. Effectively, they are on the same scale as gluons. This can't be the case, because ordinary deep inelastic scattering experiments would have shown this structure very easily. They do not of course.
This discrepancy contradicts the zetetic approach: if this theory WAS true, then we should be able to observe its consequences. Sadly, observations DO NOT show subquark structure, in fact, according to this theory, these subquark strings are LARGER than the quarks themselves....so how can they possibly be "subquarks?"
I think you may want to find out a little more about what a quark really is.....
It seems to me that a lot of fancy words are being employed here, without actual knowledge about what those words really mean. You cannot simply just use the word "quark" and have it mean whatever you want. Because a definition for this word already exists, and is quite different than the definition used in these works.
I am sorry, but this is probably the wrong approach.