Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.

[Q]: Wish this information from your January 14th article had been brought forward to this update:

” This year’s policy debate topic focuses on domestic surveillance by the federal government. For half of their rounds, debaters are assigned to argue for reducing surveillance. During the other half, debaters will argue for maintaining present levels of surveillance”

The subject of a debate should always be part of a real news story. Obviously, if it is extemporaneous debate, that isn’t possible. Here, you had the information two months ago and just lost it between article and update.
[A]: No


[Q]: Militia's aren't your friend nor are they trying to protect or help anyone except themselves.  Please inform yourselves about what Sovereign Citizen Movement Militias are trying to do.  This militia group associated with this philosophy of Sovereign Citizens who believe in their right to not obey the laws, pay taxes they're lawless and make up their own laws and Constitution. These Militias  have killed more law enforcement across the  United States than any other movement.  The the membership is  all white extremists hate group who want to overthrow the State and United States Government.  They're not good guys they criminals and they kill people and seek revenge. Militia's hold  Kangaroo Courts, bully, stalk, harass and kill  people in communities that disagree. Communities do not want their help or protection so please get educated about these Sovereign Citizen Militias, they're dangerous.
[A]: Yes


[Q]: Reinhold has so much courage that she won't even specify where she'd gut the budget.  This is her third or fourth op-ed and she just can't seem to roll it off her hypocritical lips where she'd gut.
[A]:
Yes