You will be given a definition of a task first, then an example. Follow the example to solve a new instance of the task.
In this task, you're given two sentences. Indicate if the first sentence clearly entails the second sentence (i.e., one can conclude the 2nd sentence by reading the 1st one). Indicate your answer with '1' if the first sentence entails the second sentence, otherwise answer with '0'.

Sentence 1: No Weapons of Mass Destruction Found in Iraq Yet. Sentence 2:Weapons of Mass Destruction Found in Iraq.
Solution: 0
Why? In our first statement we clearly say that Iraq does not have any weapon of mass destruction but the second sentence says that weapon of mass destruction is found in Iraq which is contradiction. Hence output will be 0 for non entailment.

New input: Sentence 1: A run by Mr. Feinblatt would complicate what is already a three-person race because he most likely would have the support of the powerful mayor, who is running for a third term. Such a move could also irritate the outgoing district attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, because it could hurt the chances of his preferred candidate, Cyrus R. Vance Jr. The relationship between Mr. Morgenthau and Mr. Bloomberg has been strained, in part because of the district attorney's investigation into the fire at the former Deutsche Bank building, which found that lapses by the city had contributed to the deaths of two firefighters. Sentence 2: Feinblatt works for Bloomberg.
Solution:
0