i want to pull back on this a little, as, as vicious as this was, it's not that unusual. the russians do it. the chinese do it. the americans do it, too - albeit usually in latin america. i mean, consider the case of julian assange, or what would happen to edward snowden if he came home. journalism is a very dangerous profession. it's how it's always been, and how it will always be - so long as there is power to disturb, it will react.
so, why is the case of the turkish journalist being singled out?
is there something specific about the geopolitical situation, the ancient rivalry between the saudis and turks that is in truth every bit as volatile as the rivalry between the saudis and iranians?
is it because it was an act of insolence, because the journalist was "american based"?
is it indicative of infighting in the saudi theocracy itself?
i don't know. really...
but, this event was less unique than many would like you to believe, and is in many ways a threat that is a part of the job description.