airtren, I'm 100% with you on that one.
First, sorry: I answered your question about the link to the newspaper but, it again contained a link so it is again waiting for the moderator's review. You will get it some time soon, but in the mean time you found it yourself on internet. Could be called "learning from mistakes..."
We know that nowadays pilots are less likely able to handle a stall at high speed/altitude. They were obviously confused about what was happening (taking the noise of high flow of air against the frame with tremendous speed and the like). And in the mean time, whenever they do the right thing, the stall warning which was silent while they were falling down like a stone came back in as a sort of "don't you do that"! Isn't that adding more confusion to people trained to trust what the system says ?
In short, it seems we should expect pilots who normally fly a machine that thinks for them to the extend that it won't allow them to do stupid things, all of a sudden, to understand that they should override a system indication (stall !), understand why it is wrong and do the exact opposite. All that in a little less than 4 minutes.
I don't pretend this is the cause of the disaster but still I don't agree that it should not be addressed in the future if we want this mistake not to happen again.
Besides, not all newspapers and journalists are complet idiots, I think.