In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: insult and non-insult. Insult is any lanugage or act that is disrespectful or scornfully abusive.

[EX Q]: Comment: Actually, I understand Bannon's nickname is not Honey Badger, but Ouroboros. It was given him by Scaramucci.
[EX A]: Non-insult

[EX Q]: Comment: Good point, any theocratic philosophy is a threat to constitutional democracy. Canada had a  blasphemy law. 

Violent theocrats are much worse - regardless of their religion. 

I only meant to say that The Premier was probably referring to violent Muslim theocrats which is essentially what an Islamist is. But the term is too close to Islamic and ends up stereotyping the religion. 

Given that the Ottoman empire ended just 100 years ago,  the link to religious rule is more recent in Islam. About the same time the Federal Reserve was created in America and they are still fighting about that!
[EX A]: Non-insult

[EX Q]: Comment: I agree with you that there were many thousands (I would doubt millions) of unrecognized people around the world who worked very long hours behind the scenes to prevented a Y2K catastrophe. I also agree that the many people who have claimed that Y2K was not a real problem  that needed to be addressed are idiots.

However, the author didn't say that. 

What he said was simply that the recent prognostications regarding Brexit and Trump are "no worse than when .... the Y2K bug was expected to bring civilization to an ignominious end."  I would agree with him that the people who propagated the media panic which grew into a mythical scenario in which  it was expected that planes would  drop  from the sky and elevators would crash to the basements, and civilization would come to an end at midnight New Years Eve were equally idiots.
[EX A]:
Insult