Ever the victim, Thaksin tries to explain his downfall

Over the weekend, Thaksin made two phone-ins to his red-shirt supporters in Chiang Rai and Chiang Mai.

Although most of his remarks were repetitive, he managed to raise a fresh allegation by spelling out his version of how and why the 2006 coup was engineered to oust him. His telephone conversation on Sunday was particularly revealing.

And he has promised to bare all in his next phone-in to the red-shirt crowd on Thursday at Sanam Luang.

It remains to be seen whether he has anything of substance to say or has pulled a publicity stunt in order to swell the numbers of the red shirts.

Based on his remarks on Sunday, he saw himself as a victim of a concerted effort to oust him from power.

He attributed his misfortune to what he termed a smear campaign to portray him as being disloyal to the monarchy. He singled out two chief justices, one senior judge and one democracy advocate as responsible for his legal wrangling.

The turmoil erupted soon after the 2005 general election, led into the 2006 coup and culminated in his guilty verdict for conflict of interest resulting in his decision to lead a fugitive life instead of serving two years in jail.

Thaksin's downfall took years to manifest. He should have plenty of time to reflect and gather evidence to clear his name. Yet he re-enacted a twist of his fate based on two flimsy stories which he did not bother to verify.

He quoted two individuals for shedding light on his predicament. The two have already denied their remarks as relayed by him.

For the first time, he even made an insinuation by mentioning the VIP-protection code "901", used by security details to refer to His Majesty.

He has, indeed, put his credibility at risk because he alone bears the burden of proof.

He went at length to explain why he suspected Privy Councillor Surayud Chulanont of having held a grudge since 2002.

But in the same speech, he admitted having good and amicable ties with Surayud.

Without mentioning any name, it is understood he quoted Jittanart Limthongkul of ASTV-Manager Group as saying his father and media tycoon Sondhi Limthongkul had lunch with a privy councillor, hence bringing about the opposition movement.

Jittanart countered that Thaksin made up the story.

Thaksin went on to quote retired General Panlop Pinmanee about the Panlop-Surayud meeting in 2006 at a Sukhumvit home. He said Panlop recently told him about a secret plot to assassinate him.

He also said Surayud and two other privy councillors had sought and received an audience with "901" to pledge to oust him from power.

Although he has repeatedly claimed his reverence for the King, he has yet to explain why he often invokes His Majesty in the political context. And he offers no shred of evidence to link the Privy Council to the political feud.

He is also obligated to explain why he counts as his top lieutenants such convicts and lese majeste suspects as Veera Musigapong and Jakrapob Penkair.

Like Jittanart, Panlop too has stepped out to deny his meeting with Surayud and any involvement in a secret plot to assassinate or oust Thaksin.

Instead of chasing or blaming phantoms, Thaksin should reflect long and hard on how and why his performance fuelled street protests which in turn triggered the turmoil.

More importantly, he should consider how to move on with his life instead of being grumpy about his bitterness.