Some Media Won’t Tell You When The Saudis Snub Biden

Source: Moon of Alabama.

When I was in grade school my teachers encouraged us to read international media to better understand the world. That was good advice back then, but perhaps it needs an upgrade today.

The source details a significant omission from a New York Times report today about the “Davos in the Desert” conference that will start tomorrow in Saudi Arabia. It was widely reported in Middle Eastern sources that U.S. government officials were disinvited from the conference, despite having been regular attendees in recent years. NYT omits the overt snub from its report.

To be shut out from Davos in the Desert is a big deal as it signals the U.S.’s declining influence in international commerce at a critical moment in history. More immediately, the omission reveals that the NYT is actively engaged in shaping perceptions rather than in informing them. If you trust the NYT and close your mind to other sources, your understanding of world events may become flawed.

20 thoughts on “Some Media Won’t Tell You When The Saudis Snub Biden

  1. Is the meeting really a big deal. I don’t get the impression it is.

    “The FII Institute headed by Attias is not formally affiliated with the Saudi government, but the annual conference in Riyadh is closely associated with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler.

    Attias said he did not expect the Riyadh-Washington spat to affect this year’s FII conference.

    “No impact at all. At the opposite, we see more and more appetite from the US private sector to attend FII,” Attias said, adding that organisers were “starting to refuse some delegates” for lack of space.”

    We boycotted the meeting the year MBS had a WAPO journalist butchered.

    I’d say screw the Saudis. They have never really been our friend. We built their wealth. They unleashed oil embargoes, 9/11 hijackers, used our weapons to kill Yemen civilians, doing Putin’s bidding and bailed out Trump and friends.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “Is the meeting really a big deal. I don’t get the impression it is.”

      I think the disinvitation is a big deal, whatever one thinks of the meeting or Saudi Arabia. I also think NYT’s omission and spin are significant.

      Maybe NYT believes the FII conference is unimportant, but as a newspaper it should have reported the snub.


      1. RE: “Why?”

        Because of the geopolitical context. One of the consequences of the war in Ukraine is that Russia and China have stepped up their efforts to create a new world order than shuns the collective West.


      1. Why? Because you and John say so. Do you ever verify some of the statements you make or is it just knee jerk bubble time?

        “The three-day gathering — the Future Investment Initiative, nicknamed Davos in the Desert — is set to open on Tuesday. But U.S. government officials will be notably absent, weeks after an intense and public trading of accusations between the U.S. and Saudi governments over an Oct. 5 production cut by the oil cartel OPEC Plus, co-led by Saudi Arabia and Russia.”

        You can read the rest of the article if you bother. Or just stay in your silo and kep fingers in the ears yelling waa, waa.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Is that why? Or is it the other way around…we are not sending government officials because of oil cuts during a worldwide shortage.

            You said the NYT didn’t cover it.

            It did.

            BTW, ex-Trump officials who got major commitments from Saudi funds are going. Of course no corruption there.

            And you were concerned about Hunter getting some money because of his relationship with a VP. Those officials of Trump are certainly cashing in for a lot more. Kushner made out ok on his father-in- law’s position…billions with a “b”.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. RE: “Your spin was not acceptable by the editor evidently.”

            In that case the editor has gone down in my estimation. That’s rather the point of MOA’s story.


  2. The eagerness of silly people to believe the silly spin offered by bloodthirsty dictators is quite a spectacle.

    There is one fact that is indisputable – American government officials will not attend. Why is that? Well, we have reporting (MOA) saying that is because they were not invited. We have other reporting (NYT) that says they chose not to attend. Which to believe?

    I suspect that given the fact we boycotted the last MBS soiree in 2019 and that President Biden has many reasons to be disgusted with MBS, the decision came from Washington and not Riyadh. It is Saudi Arabia’s loss and not ours that the conference has been so downgraded. It is likely that to save face MBS is putting it out that it was HIS decision. Kind of like this . . .

    Susie: I am not coming to your stupid birthday party.
    Tammie : Okay, you are not invited.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “Well, we have reporting (MOA) saying that is because they were not invited.”

      MOA provides four Middle Eastern sources that confirm U.S. officials were told not to attend. That’s the reason to doubt the NYT.


      1. I suspect there might be a little of both. The last US delegation was an assistant deputy secretary of commerce. Not nothing, but it’s closest relative.

        No reason for Biden to make nice since MBS has cast his die. He may have to gets his weapons from Russia…if they have any left.

        My beef with us is that we kept arming the murderous bastards to slaughter civilians. That should end…now, if not sooner.

        Our MIC is more in charge than they should be, so a drop of Saudi purchases won’t be a bad thing.


        Liked by 2 people

      2. Like I said, MBS put out the word that HE made the decision that the U.S. government would not attend. So, of course, Middle Eastern sources got the word from him. NYT has people on the ground in DC. They are a “newspaper of record” whether you like it or not. I trust them. You don’t. Your loss.

        You want to see it as a snub by MBS? Knock yourself out.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Wikipedia: “A newspaper of record is a major national newspaper with large circulation whose editorial and news-gathering functions are considered authoritative and independent; they are thus ‘newspapers of record by reputation’ and include some of the oldest and most widely respected newspapers in the world.”

        That NYT is considered a newspaper of record is exactly the point. In this case NYT failed to live up to its reputation.

        Sadly, the present incident is one of many that go back decades.


        1. Do you read the NYT? Or just parrot whatever other sources say about it?

          Remember, the NYT article did say we would not be sending administration officials this year. You insisted it did not. The position you take it was a “snub” by MBS. The more logical is a “snub” by the US for oil cuts. We have boycotted before, 2019 I think, so for us it is nothing new or extraordinary.

          Again, ex-Trump officials who received investments from the Saudis due to connections to the White House are going. Where is the “laptop” for this cronyism? Business as usual, apparently.

          Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s