PJ2 (and others) have verified my contention that there is no scenario in which one would contemplate dumping fuel (if so equipped) in a mid-Atlantic ditching event. And even if fuel had been dumped at altitude (or otherwise released in a pre-impact break-up scenario) there is no way it would arrive at the surface, nor remain on the surface, in such a detectable form.
So let's agree to ignore the Drift Group's use of the phrase "voluntary or not" and simply deal with the "slick" or "pollution" or whatever it was that existed on the sea surface when the satellite took that shot. The "stain" (as I would prefer to call it because we don't know what it actually is) is approximately 1km in length at its longest point and perhaps half that in total width (widest point of separation of the two arms). Did it show in any other shots taken in the hours or days before or afterwards? Seems not, or that would have been reported, so all we know is that an anomaly existed that could have been kerosene at a time and in a location that generally corresponds with the disappearance of AF447.
So my point is simply this: If that exact location was not surveyed thoroughly by the undersea location resources when they were available, it could turn out to be a major blunder.
Discussion?