Glenn Beck has been pushing the utterly implausible conspiracy theories that the Obama administration's recent actions with regard to Egypt and the Middle East may lead to chaos and the destruction of Israel. Today he revealed just how ridiculous the conspiracy is by accidentally implicating close associates of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as players in that conspiracy.

Duing his show, Beck alleged that while “nobody was looking” the Obama National Security Council met with democracy advocates again in 2010 in order to push for more free and fair elections in Egypt. Beck cited a Politico article about Obama's national security team: Project for the Middle East and Democracy, Human Rights Watch, Carnegie Endowment, Brookings Institute, Freedom House, and the Center for American Progress.

The point of Beck's ramblings? To prove that bogeyman George Soros was involved in each of these organizations and that the actions they advocated made things more dangerous for Israel because Israeli ally Hosni Mubarak was forced to give up power.

Well, the Politico article does indeed cite some groups that have received some money from Soros' Open Society Institute such as the Center for American Progress. But Beck failed to mention some other participants in the meeting, including the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Elliot Abrams who worked under the Bush administration's National Security Council.

Why would Beck fail to mention the Washington Institute for Near East Policy? Perhaps because the Washington Institute for Near East Policy is a think tank established by AIPAC. And AIPAC regularly features Washington Institute for Near East Policy personnel in its policy conference.

Why didn't Beck mention Abrams? Abrams is also a regular speaker at AIPAC events.

It's funny that Beck would ignore these players in his conspiracy theory, especially since he is so adept at weaving everyone and anyone into his mind-boggling theories. I mean, a man who can characterize the current situation in the Ivory Coast, where an authoritarian ruler refuses to concede to his loss in the presidential election as a "Marxist-Islamic revolution" must have some sort of “skill.”

So there are a few questions Mr. Beck has yet to answer. Did he just miss the participation of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and Abrams in the meeting he is so concerned about? Or is he being selective about the information that he chooses to reveal to his audience and highlighting only the facts that fit his agenda? Or is he now implicating AIPAC's close associates in bringing an end to Israel? Whichever it is, Mr. Beck has a lot of explaining to do.