::::::i think people misinterpret the word doubt. They argue that the US had no doubt and as such no competent tribunal has to be held. Assuming that is correct, could those advocating there is no doubt answer these question? 
 :::::::#Does doubt refer to Bush having any doubt, or does it refer to the international community having any doubt? 
 :::::::#If the United Nations, Red Cross, Amnesty International, Human Right Watch, and many more countries and organisations say there is doubt, can the US say there is no doubt? 
 :::::::#If a suspect not captured on the battlefield vehemently denies all charges, can the US say there is no doubt? 
 :::::::#If we review the numerous "enemy combatants" that turn out to be innocent (not linked to terrorism, not having fought the US, not being present at any battlefield, et cetera) can the US maintain there is never any doubt as they themselves reverse that designation after being presented with facts contradicting the US position? 
 :::::::