(1) "NYC Turns Back to Gas Buses After Finding Out the Hard Way That the Electric Versions Have Big Problems,"

(2) "As a Former Head of MI6 it's Clear That Britain's Climate Policy is Leaving Us Dangerously Exposed to Our Enemies," and

(3) "Spain: 74% of sex-crime suspects are foreigners in Basque Country."

They come from three different Western nations and involve three dissimilar subjects - public transportation, national security, and violent crime - yet each news story exposes the real-world consequences of government failure:

(1) In order to pursue "Net Zero" carbon goals, New York dumped a ton of money into electric buses that are too expensive and entirely unreliable for the city's needs.

(2) Britain's former top spy is finally ready to admit publicly that his country's delusional obsession with "climate change" has devastated the United Kingdom's capacity for industrial and energy self-sufficiency, rendering the former superpower dependent on foreign adversaries for future survival.

(3) Even though foreigners make up only 10% of the Basque region's population, they account for 74% of rape arrests, 73% of homicide arrests, 95% of drunk-driving arrests, 80% of theft arrests, and 78% of violent robberies.

What's so striking about these news stories is their "well, duh!" factor. An ordinary, rational person would have no problem predicting the failures of a citywide electric bus fleet, the offshoring of a nation's critical industries, or open border policies that invite foreign invasion. Yet mayors, governors, and prime ministers have pursued these catastrophic programs anyway, while heads of espionage agencies and millions of government bureaucrats either support their harmful decisions or shamefully stay silent.

The middle article links to the transcript of a speech that Sir Richard Dearlove delivered to the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London last week. It was a good speech concerning an important subject, and Dearlove deserves some credit for articulating a point of view that goes against the powerful flow of "politically correct" Western orthodoxy. But he gave this speech from the comfortable perch of quasi-retirement with little to lose aside from a few honorary board positions. Where was his voice when he was in a position to actually do something about the U.K.'s suicidal energy policies?

In his speech, Dearlove explained how his Cold War experiences taught him "that the country's war-fighting potential resided in its industry, that our most vulnerable link was the fuel chain...and that our industrial base could be rebuilt and repaired." Now, however, there is "very little industry left to protect, and we cannot rebuild non-existent industries which lie in foreign jurisdictions beyond our reach." Dearlove concluded that the U.K. must "rebuild the strategic industries we require to ensure that we can defend our island fortress and be a reliable ally to friendly democracies around the world."