In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: toxic and non-toxic. Toxicity is defiend as anything that is rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable that would make someone want to leave a converation.
--------
Question: Comment: This thing has reported today in the citizen. Read the article. As useless and parasitic as ever. No end to these parasitic imbeciles.

Answer: Toxic

Question: Comment: You're a fucking piece of shit idiot HRC supporting asshat. Hillary and idiots like you elected Trump by cheating Mr Sanders out of his rightful place as the Dem candidate. Here you are now trying to run your corrupt bullshit game on him some more. Go fuck yourself. This shit is your fault and you're trying to put that on the old, smart socialist Jew. Eat shit fucktard.

Answer: Toxic

Question: Comment: T.O. Mann: you've been less than forthright in summarizing the remedial aspect of the 2010 SCC case the way.

That aspect of the decision was meticulously worded, even for the SCC, but amounts to:

'We're not going to make you repatriate him, government, we're going to leave it up to you to do the correct thing.

'When you are figuring out what that correct thing is - and listen very carefully here - remember that the impact of Canada's Charter violations are continuing to this day and, unless Khadr's circumstances change, will continue into the future. Got it?"

They also added a statement that, to most people, indicated that a refusal to repatriate Khadr NOW would further increase liability in the damages case. The Harper government refused to bring him back for another 2 1/2 years.

ps, many of the British detainees had been held in Guantanamo about 1/5 the time Khadr spent. Work it out.

Answer:
Non-toxic