The glaring problem appears to be with your analysis. Did you miss the 6 months of news since the story you posted?
Perhaps you overlooked the Reuters story in July: “Exclusive: Congress Delaying U.S. aid to Syrian Rebels.”
Or the USA Today story, also in July: “U.S. arms haven’t reached Syrian rebels, analysts say.”
Or yesterday’s quote in the New York Times:
“Based on that conclusion, Mr. Obama authorized a limited program of supplying the Syrian rebels with arms, which have yet to arrive.”
Who knows, maybe your story from the facebook page of a friend of an anonymous Russian source who leaked material to a Lebanese newspaper is more credible than consistent reports from the NYT, Reuters, USA Today, Al Jazeera, The Huffington Post, and countless others.
Attempts by the CIA to screen recipients is much different than a U.S. led program to supply weapons, which is what the US said it was going to do and which has not really materialized, as Ramah accurately noted in her piece.
But why let facts get in the way of strongly voiced opinions?