In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

[EX Q]: Comment: The Canadians who responded to this poll obviously have limited horizons and are locked in the antiquated nation state paradigm. Our illustrious, omniscient PM has leap frogged light years ahead of us and, together with a few of his equally narcissistic, delusional friends (such as Bono), sees himself as a leader of the nationless, borderless new world order.

He must find it so tiresome to have to deal with our naive lack of understanding of these things.
[EX A]: Non-threat

[EX Q]: Comment: Definitely NOT. Besides your ignorantly equating Christianity and Islam as being equivalent or the same when they are not, one, people indulging in their private sexual predilections, that does nothing but give them cheap thrills, is not the same as religion, particularly Christianity which is the foundation of civilization in Europe and the United States. Comparing what people do with their wing ding or other body crevices with Christianity is highly asinine. Two, there is no civil right to engage in any sexual behavior you want to engage in, based on nothing but just because you feel like it. Necrophilia, pedophilia and bestiality must be allowed also based on that.

But why the cherry picked hatred of Christianity and Islam? Buddhism and Hinduism are ok, but Christianity and Islam are not? Based on what do you make that distinction? Is that based solely upon whether some let you do whatever you feel like doing and some don't? That would be a myopic, self absorbed basis.
[EX A]: Non-threat

[EX Q]: Comment: Man, just die already.
[EX A]:
Threat