I notice you didn't cite your comment about the lack of reciprocal respect from the prisoners. Also "reciprocal respect" would in this instance mean the prisoners water-boarding guards, depriving them of sleep, and pissing on their holy book or did you forget what reciprocal means?
If a faith requires you to threaten death and destruction on any who do not worship or treat your holy book in a dignified manner deserve all the scorn and disrespect heaped upon them.
This is your opinion. Also please show me proof these specific prisoners "threaten death and destruction" on anyone and that their faith requires it(plenty of Muslims would disagree). Generally such proof is presented during a trial.
I know there are some prisoners that should not be there and I support the release of all but the most radical prisoners
How do you propose this is done without a trial? And no keeping them all locked up is not supporting the release of the innocents.
They should count themselves lucky that they are allowed to have a Quran in the first place.
Why is that? We here in the USA do not deprive prisoners of the right to read, there is no reason we should to people we incarcerate abroad.
Radical Islam is a scourge all over the world and is responsible for a great deal of today's problems and until the "peaceful" Muslim's eradicate these abominations using all the means and methods at their disposal they do not deserve any respect.
That is your opinion, and a very radical one at that. Was the purpose of the quotes you added to the word peaceful intended to imply that peaceful Muslims do not exist? Why do peaceful Muslims bear the responsibility of eradicating anyone?