Fun fact, some of those (obviously false) statements regarding nuclear energy may in fact be true depending on interpretation of their original meaning. We still have yet to harness mass-energy-equivalence for power. Modern nuclear energy, both fission and fusion, are more accurately nuclear potential energy (like a hydro electric plant and water).

From Wikipedia[1]:

    E = mc2 has frequently been invoked as an explanation for the origin of energy
    in nuclear processes specifically, but such processes can be understood as
    converting nuclear potential energy in a manner precisely analogous to the
    way that chemical processes convert electrical potential energy.

I don't know, but it seems reasonable to me to conclude that when Einstein stated the following, he may have been referring to mass-energy-equivalence rather than nuclear potential energy, which in fact continues to hold true for the foreseeable future:

    There is not the slightest indication that [nuclear energy] will ever be
    obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence