Is Obama stopping Keystone Pipeline to help Arab countries?

  I really don't see how anyone can observe the actions of our current POTUS Obama and not think that he is, at the very least, more sympathetic to the welfare of other countries--many run by Islamists--rather than the welfare of the people of the United States.
  The threat of bringing Ebola to this country through non-citizens and at a cost of half a million dollars per individual exemplifies the lack of concern this administration has evidenced. Sure, the Psaki flack claimed first that it didn't exist and then that some mid level flunkie wrote it and it's been tabled.
  Still, why would someone write this and circulate it in the first place? 
  From the beginning of Obama's apology tour, we can look back and see how he has kowtowed to Muslim leaders in deference rather than act like the leader of the greatest nation in the world.
  Every informed voter remembers this image:

  In fact, Obama routinely bows to other world leaders, in deference, one presumes, to the countries that are greater than the US.
  Time after time, we've seen our current POTUS Obama either ignore the aggressive actions of Muslim countries or acquiesce to their wishes.
  Who can forget the rioting young people screaming for freedom in Iran, even calling out Obama's name for help? And who can forget Obama's silence in the face of their demands for help?
  Meanwhile, courageous Muslims like the doctor who helped our current POTUS Obama locate Osama bin Laden--a major reelection selling point--- sit and rot in jail.
  There is very little loyalty in our current POTUS other than for cronies who further his cause and bow to him the way he bows to world leaders.
  Some wags have even labeled Obama's apologies for America as an intentional humiliation of a once great though now diminished country. ("We're arrogant," We've made wrong decisions," "we sought to dictate our terms," blah blah blah.)
  Now I might pose a question concerning Obama's intentional lowering of America's profile in the world and, certainly, his intentional lowering of our economic output by encouraging millions and millions of cheap laborers to illegally enter the country.
  So I ask this.
  Is Obama intentionally stopping completion of the Keystone Pipeline--not just to pacify his "environmentalist" extremist base--but in deference to the Saudis, who have repeatedly expressed concern that OPEC's grip on the oil market is weakening with American oil output?
  One might remember that American oil is just about the only business sector keeping the American economy afloat.
  Even (al) Reuters notes that the Saudis are worried about the increase in American output:

Saudi Arabia has privately told the oil market that it is willing to allow prices to slide as low as $80 for a year or two, in a move seen aimed at U.S. producers. Kuwait and Iran have since said that they have no plan to cut production. That is putting pressure on companies like Continental Resources and EOG Resources whose share prices are unraveling.

  You might notice gas prices decreasing; you can understand why when you read the above quote. Falling prices are intentional, an effort to squeeze out the burgeoning American market and prevent American independence.
  In 2013 in an article entitled "Top Saudi investor says US energy boom could doom kingdom's economy," the urgency of the coming Saudi bust was revealed:

Our country is facing a threat with the continuation of its near-complete reliance on oil, especially as 92 percent of the budget for this year depends on oil," wrote Alwaleed, who owns seven percent of the voting shares in News Corp, the former parent company of Fox News. "It is necessary to diversify sources of revenue, establish a clear vision for that and start implementing it immediately."

  We've often decried Obama's lack of leadership around the world which is why the whole globe is spinning off its axis with wars and rumors of wars.
  But in this, we must ask.
  Is Obama propping up Arab oil rather than let the American oil industry flourish?
  It's certainly not unreasonable, given his preference for global interests rather than American.