Well, I have read enough Supreme Court cases on it to know what the legal right is, to what we have done. I don't need a youtube to tell me anything more then what you have. I believe they get fed well. If that is the plus in your category, then that is fine, but it isn't enough.
I know that there are bad detainees there, but I also know there have been US citizens there (Hamdi) and people that were collected much like he has was, and possibly not guilty of anything but being in the wrong place at the wrong time (but we will not know that, will we?). That is why I said it as I had ("being placed in prison for no cause (or at least no charge)"). I give you that there may be people there who should remain, but not all of them. Even the Supreme Court has said as much. The place is filled with secrets, and the "facts" that get our are just what the adminstration wants out. If the place is rainbows and rose pedals, then follow what the other "equal" branch has told them.
Also, I didn't say torture, I said "interigation (of unknown severity)." My point is that they are not better off then they were before they were captured. So while given that some, if not most should be there, the propoganda that we are doing them a favor isn't correct; we are doing ourselves a favor, and we need to do what is internationally correct - follow the geneva convention, and if they want a classification of prisoners to get around that, then follow what the Supreme Court has told them (charge them).
Finally, this comparison to what the "peace loving insurgents" do to justify what we can do is a circle. Somewhere there is an Iraqi telling another Iraqi that it is okay to behead because the US kills their hostages as well.