First thoughts on the NIE

I'm sure there will be alot written about the Iraq NIE today (unclassified version to be released after lunch,) but in reference to this first WaPo report my question is: Who leaked?

My fear in this process was that the NIE would be supplied to the Congress and then any leaks of the document would be blamed on them, justifying limiting their future intelligence flow, but it didn't even get that far. (A Congressional aide is cited, but he hasn't even seen the report yet.)

So, were the leaks from the intelligence community, or is the White House trying to put forth a "softer" preemptive view?

The two important points I see in this first look: 1) The civil war is a far greater threat than Al Qaeda, and 2) Iran is "mentioned, but not a focus."

For years, the administration has been trying to externalize the Iraq failure by blaming outside actors, but this formal document collecting the views of all 16 intelligence agencies doesn't support that view.

It carefully avoids the politically loaded phrase "civil war," but how else am I to interpret sectarian "Iraqi on Iraqi" violence as the primary threat?

(More later, I'm sure.)

30 minutes later: The AP has a slightly different spin that sounds like the White House interpretation/response:

The general conclusion was that the biggest security problem is of a sectarian nature but that outside Iranian involvement makes the situation worse. Similarly, it said that Syria's failure to control its borders has allowed foreign jihadists to enter Iraq.

The administration said the document provided clear and compelling evidence of why the U.S. strategy in Iraq had to be changed. Bush, in a policy reversal, announced on Jan. 10 that he was sending an additional 21,500 U.S. troops to Iraq.

(I just see Hadley pulling up on a street corner with his driver and government issued black sedan, "Hey, little reporter boy... Do you want some candy?)