And with due respect you should have answer my questions rather than making a silly comments about my knowledge or education.
I can promise you, Economic had been my subject of choice, what qualifications you have apart from getting others work and include some financial terms which many people wouldn't understand anyway.
This is first episode, now I suggest answer my questions and prove how Musharaf prop up the Rupee?
Secondly, your point of view about current Government propping up the Rupee is self defeating. The truth and reality is Rupee has lost over 50% of its value in last 4 years. I am quite convinced it would go down well over Rs100 or even Rs110 to $1.
I have got many questions based on your rather foolish explanations, but like I said I would go through them one by one, gradually.
Next time prove your point with proofs or accept you haven't got a clue.
As much as intervention by SBP or any central bank, this is their duty if the currency comes under pressure. Every central bank does it, get a really check my friend. You are talking to a professional. I purposefully use common language so readers understand it, otherwise you should have no doubts, I know the terms and how markets works.
This time answer the real questions and provide proofs. As much as "The News" concerned, do you really think they are any indications of quality of the material?


I have seen comments by many on your recent article, I think you are not realising but many have sussed out your knowledge is dependent on other people's work and presentations. I am having this feelings you don't even fully understand their work, let alone explaining to me or other knowledgeable people.
As for "The News" and its Editor Malick; here is an email from him accepting and giving an apology for his rather awful English.
Let me tell you in plain English, I have seen your highlighted part and I have seen when you opened another thread with this graph and grid. You don't even understand a simple fact from your highlighted portion that it is showing the impact since 1st July 2011 to 20 April 2012, i.e. contraction, indicated by -244, 804. It doesn't means that the reserves or deposits were in negative, but only the variance from 1st July, i.e. 780,253 - 244,804. But if your foolish Eyes could see, the next column which is until 23 April 2012 is showing a plus movement of +159, 095. In other words, there was movement between 20th April and 23 April 2012 which not only covered the negative impact on 20th, but the deposits gone in to positive impact compared to 1 July 2011.
When I saw your first thread, I smiled on your stupidity and ignored it.
This time I may not be so forgiving considering the language you have used.
When you are capable of reading the graphs and figures you presented and explaining and supporting your own presentation (oh sorry, I means others copied work.lol) then and only then you should raise fingers at others.
As for The News and its editor, they don't know their fronts from their backs. 
Next time be civilised an answer the questions, you should be rest assured I will take you to abyss, gradually.