No, an ad hominen attack is a fallacious argument where one party attacks another's character to challenge their argument. The only opinion I wrote about the CIA's character was that they generally contribute to the public good, even if they are not perfect (no one is):

> there is, however, no doubt that they have also made contributions to the public good. I am merely pointing out that the CIA is not a purely altruistic and infallible source.

The rest were just facts that are in the public domain already, not opinions or personal attacks.

If you are being asked to take someone's or an organization's word on something, their credibility is a reasonable thing to address, so that's why the post is relevant.

Your post, however, comes across as attacking the argument with insult without substantiation.