So, did it crash because the system allowed most if not all data to the pilots to be false in this situation?
Perhaps it's time to revisit the Bea note:
2 h 10 min 05: (...) The recorded parameters show a sharp fall from about 275 kt to 60 kt in the speed displayed on the left primary flight display (PFD), then a few moments later in the speed displayed on the integrated standby instrument system (ISIS).
2 h 10 min 16: (...) The speed displayed on the left side increased sharply to 215 kt (Mach 0.68).(...)
2 h 10 min 51: (...) Around fifteen seconds later, the speed displayed on the ISIS increased sharply towards 185 kt; it was then consistent with the other recorded speed.
(...)
Note: The inconsistency between the speeds displayed on the left side and on the ISIS lasted a little less than one minute.
From all we know, they temporarily lost airspeed.
Is it a good thing that when you want to input a control movement you are in essence asking a computer permission, and if permission is granted it may or may not be exactly what you thought you wanted. (For you and your passengers own good of course)
At which point do you suggest the plane didn't do what the pilot asked from it because of the FCS?
Is the system overall so complicated that a mere human cannot fully comprehend all of the scenarios thrown his way and if so what are we doing in the cockpit anyway?
EMIT was talking about Acars messages. They're used to confuse technicians, not pilots...