I'm sure there are folks who agree with the "letter", but there's something fishy about it.
I'd agree, I don't see why they'd be printing an outside opinion from a no-one. Note the article in 37, they relented and printed the David Horowitz ad because of his reputation, though I'd guess that wasn't enough for free publicity.
Who on earth is Ariel Sinovsky? This could only be printed based on an appreciation of his view by the faculty.