The author misunderstands the situation.
Wahhabism and the Islam practiced by the Shiite Ayatollahs of Iran are very similar. All they are is an attempt to follow Islam as Muhammad practiced it.
Trying to say Wahhabism is an aberration is just wrong. It is simply Islam as Muhammad practiced it.
Online books:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/library.htm
well Abu Wahhab says his school of thought is the definitive school of thought, just like the Jehovah Witness think their version of Christianity is the right way, is it?
speak to a Sufi scholar and he can tear apart the Wahhabis and why they aren't following the Koran etc......keeping in mind that Babba Zee has already forewarned that even Sufi scholars are to taken with some skepticism [the Taqiyaa]
but clearly Islam was different before Wahhab developed his own school of thought because many Arabs opposed his efforts and Wahhabism didn't grow really until those petrodollars started flowing - Bernard Lewis does have a theory though- he says take the Arab humilation at watching the Ottoman Empire crumbling, suffering under colonialism, watching the Europeans beginning to surpass the formerly great Islamic Empire in all things - as a people, you have two responses - either you figure out what the other guy is doing right, and try to do it better or you turn inwards, thinking God is punishing us for being bad so we must become better Muslims, therefore the appeal of fundamentalism, of course what Lewis says is the Muslim's chose the wrong door because as a result the Islamic world only falls further and further behind and becomes more and more frustrated.....all prime recruitment for Islamist terrorists.....who want to take Islam all the way back.....to the 7th century......one suspects however even in Mohammad's day, Islam was not as strict as practiced by the Wahhabis, it could not have been or the Islamic Empire would not have reached the heights that it did.......
there are four schools of thought in Sunni Islam alone, more in Shia
yes the Iranian Mullahs have the same concepts politically and to some extent religiously but there are some big variations between Shiite and Sunni, big,
like the whole concept of temporary marriages - it is just an excuse to have sex before marriage
if anyone has read Ayatollah Khomeini's writings, a lot of sexual perversion seems to be "allowed" in Shia as practiced in Iran
the Iraqi Shias are a different sect than Iranian Shias, even some Iraqi Shias don't approve of some practices of Iranian Shias for example, Iraqi Shias actually have it in their sect that clerics should not hold political office, [it is unseemly and hey, they have a great point] that is why Sistani does not believe in a theocracy......
I remember reading as well that the Wahhabis and the Mullahs both believe in the Global Ummah but they have different ways of achieving it, I cannot remember now how it was different, in any event where they truly differ of course is the Wahhabis believe in the Sunni Ummah and the Mullahs in the Shia Ummah, so if it ever comes to that, that will be a fun conflagration - Shia vs Sunni, the Shia are outnumbered but frankly they seem to have more passion....put your bets down......
the key however to the expansion of Islamist terrorism some opine is that the Shia and Sunni terrorist crowds have for the most part come to a understanding that it is better for them to fight vs the West and in particular US and Israel together rather than each other, United We Stand, Divided We Fall, and I think that helped the Global Jihad Movement grow during the 1990's.....they figure let's get rid of our enemies first, we'll fight later about whose going to prevail in the Global Ummah later.......