"Didn't AF447 (an A330) crash due to a stall which was the result of one of the pilots misinterpreting data and so holding the stick back too long? By your logic, the plane shouldn't have allowed this to happen.
Sure, I believe the data was incorrect because of a frozen pitot, but therefore you cannot say these "accidents could not happen on an Airbus".."
Yes, the pilots did that. But the computer only allowed it because it was operating under "alternate law".
The flight computer of the airbus can operate under two configurations: "normal law" and "alternate law".
The "normal law" mode is the one we are used to read about: the computer is always second guessing the pilot, and doing its best to keep the plane and the humans safe and comfortable.
The "alternate law" kicks in when (if) the computer decides it cannot fly the airplane in a safe way. The clogging of two pitot tubes in that plane did that. Under "alternate law" the pilot can do whatever he wants. The computer plays Pontius Pilate, and "washes its hands".
When in "alternate law" there is an alarm/warning in the cockpit (don't remember what is, but it exists).
Due to poor training, the pilot AND co-pilot didn't realize they were under "alternate law". So they didn't believe the stall alarm, since it would be impossible to happen. They kept increasing pitch, without increasing engine power. The rest we know.