My guess is the syndicate pays the last user a heavy fee if returned after use.
I think you’re right. The person who arranged the Malaysia flight (a “Mr. Ali”) was apparently a fairly well-known people-smuggler.
But it seems to me, if both passports were reported stolen, and duly listed with Interpol, and then both passports were subsequently used (basically within the same year) to apply for visas for two individuals traveling together to China (which visa clearance process had to link to Intelligence on some scale), why didn’t the stolen passport names send off bells at Interpol? If the names weren’t on a no-fly/cancelled passport list after they were stolen, why didn’t they end up on such a list after the China visa application? On the surface, this information of the same two individuals (passports?) traveling together from Kalua to the same destination a year prior, and the current situation with the missing Malaysian flight seems to point to the completion of something originally planned for June 2013. The hiring manager in China mentioned the existence of a third man, a “manager” who was unnamed, but also was to travel with the other two. Hopefully this new information will open the base of leads to pursue.