You are discussing apples and oranges. The insertions you listed were made after the split and are not found in the same regions of DNA. The ones RNW mentioned were made before the split and are found in identical regions of the DNA.
That is the suggestion.
If true, and I am not arguing against the suggestion, it is indicative, as I said, that such commonalities are in fact more common than made out to be in arguments for their being evidence of common descent.
The reason the suggestion is made in the chimp genome paper that these are separate germ line insertions is becuase it was surprising to see them.
My point is only that it is not as pat and simple and cut and dried as the evangalists at t.o. make it appear.
Genomic science is fascinating and shouldn't be filtered with pre-conceived notions whose main purpose in the first place was as a form of evangelisim.