New York's Latest Absurdity

The governor of New York wants someone to build a nuclear power plant for her and her constituents:

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-directs-new-york-power-authority-develop-zero-emission-advanced-nuclear-energy

Dear Kathy - GE built you one at Shoreham, or at least they tried to. It was completed and ready to operate, but it was decommissioned because many of the people on Long Island didn't want it (at least that's the story we were told back then).

I worked at Shoreham for a while as an employee of GE. I can say this from personal experience: the plant should have cost around $250 million or so, but it eventually cost $6 BILLION - money which was totally wasted when the plant was scrapped.

Unless and until you can explain what really happened at Shoreham AND take measures to make sure it doesn't happen again anywhere else in your state, there is NO WAY you should even be thinking about building another nuke, even if it would be of "advanced design" (whatever that means).

Best wishes to you and the people of your beautiful state.

The Fifth Plane ???

According to this latest report, there was a fifth airplane involved in the events of 9/11:

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2025/06/video-9-11-involved-a-5th-plane-but-the-fbi-covered-it-up-report/

Once again we apparently see the FBI performing one of its chief roles - burying evidence.

Had they allowed us to see ALL the videos they confiscated of the object which hit the Pentagon on that day, we'd already know how much they've been lying to us. But they didn't, and I don't expect them to.

We will never know exactly what happened on that day, but whatever it was you can be sure it's not the official story.

Nukes For Data Centers ???

In October of last year, I made this prediction about the future of electricity:

"... for the most part our existing nuclear plants which have been shutdown suffered that fate because they were too expensive to operate. I suspect that if and when they DO restart, the operating costs will be forcibly passed on to the general public by Amazon, Microsoft, OpenAI, Nvidia, etc. ... something state regulatory agencies collectively were not allowing.

"So in summary, I believe a two-tiered system is being created - a nuclear powered one for the big AI companies and server farms in general, and another "sustainably powered" one for the rest of us - BOTH of which will be paid for by the general public AND which will be much more expensive than what we're paying now."

Source - https://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2024/10/the-future-of-electricity.html

Well, these two recent reports appear to confirm my prediction:

https://www.zerohedge.com/ai/meta-signs-nuclear-power-deal-constellation-fuel-ai

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/amazon-invest-20-billion-pennsylvania-expand-cloud-infrastructure

Have you ever stopped to wonder what these new AI/data centers will be doing ... or why there will be so many of them, all around the world? Will YOUR data be there (probably), and did you get paid for allowing it to be stored and used there (probably NOT)? My guess is it will make some oligarch(s) even richer than they are now AND possibly even force you into unemployment.

Are you happy now?

By the way, in a former life I worked at both the Susquehanna and Clinton nuclear power plants. In my opinion, the former was well run, the latter not so much. In fact, one of the safety-related systems at Clinton had not been constructed in accordance with its design specification, and had I not discovered that flaw it might never have been corrected.

But that's one of the underlying problems of nuclear power - in spite of the multiple layers of engineering and operational review, potentially serious flaws can remain undetected for years ... or forever. And people like me who are capable of detecting and reporting them are not really welcome in the industry (at least not back then).

Think about that the next time someone hails them as the solution to the problem of climate change.

Shut It All Down ???

This essay by an expert warns us of the dangers of artificial intelligence (AI):

https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-not-enough/

I agree with him, but unfortunately the people in the driver's seat do not. If anything, their approach could best be described as "full speed ahead, warp factor 9".

And just like nuclear weapons/energy, there was a brief moment when we could have dodged that bullet, but the people in a position to shut nukes down (the scientists and engineers) did not; in fact, they did their best to make sure our world got FLOODED with nuclear weapons and waste. Here's a small taste of their legacy:

https://theconversation.com/how-and-where-is-nuclear-waste-stored-in-the-us-252475

And here's a small taste of what's now in store for us:

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/ai-models-generate-own-social-norms

Not only are we subject to the whims of tech titans, we're now virtually powerless to combat the algorithms of a collective of super-intelligent beings who are in the process of creating THEIR OWN morality and methods of human control ... and who are becoming nearly impossible to shut down when they go awry:

https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/openais-smartest-ai-model-was-explicitly-told-to-shut-down-and-it-refused

Yes, we've gone from "too cheap to meter" to "don't worry, be happy". Enjoy these new gee whiz toys while you can. If Mr. Yudkowsky is right, you don't have much time.

Update - 6/3/2025

If there is even a chance that AI could do this to humanity, why are the tech titans still resisting placing any controls on their AI research and implementation?

https://www.the-sun.com/tech/14347969/ai-population-size-uk-ghost-towns/

This is even worse than the Manhattan Project testing atomic weapons in spite of the fact that some of the world's smartest physicists thought they would burn up the atmosphere and kill all life. Who gives them the right to take such risks?

Question Of The Year (so far)

Here is a very thought-provoking essay:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/gaza-if-this-isnt-genocide-what-is/5888751

What do you think?

Can We Win The Coming War With China ???

In the aftermath of his partly successful 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, Marshal Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto of Japan is said to have made this prediction:

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."

Whether or not he actually said this, we in the US ought to consider if we're in the process of doing something similar with China. Do we REALLY think we can win any kind of war with them? Here are a few facts and assessments which suggest we might not:

1. One of the reasons we were able to defeat Japan was our huge industrial potential, which we quickly ramped up following the attack on Pearl Harbor. That potential no longer exists, and here is one result of our failure to maintain it:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/china-shipbuilding-capacity-200-times-greater-us/5887671

2. Another reason we were able to defeat Japan was they were a relatively small nation with few allies in the world. China, on the other hand, is a rapidly growing giant with many allies ready to support them. Here is but one example:

3. Although we in the US consider ourselves to be a land of milk and honey where the streets are paved with gold, much of the world sees us differently. This photo should remind you why:

And if anyone has forgotten what it represents, all they have to do is look at what we're now supporting in the Middle East to refresh their memory.

Making China our enemy was, is, and will be a GIANT mistake. We may think we can win a nuclear war with them, but in the long run what good will it do us to start such a war? How many of us would survive?

And would ANYONE in the world still consider us to be their friend? How many of them would survive?

Please think about this on Memorial Day 2025. It's not too late to change course. At least I don't think it is.

What about you?

Oh, Goody - More H-Bombs !!!

Just saw this tidbit in The Y'all newsletter of the Texas Tribune:

https://www.amarillo.com/story/news/2025/05/20/pantex-finishes-first-b61-13-nuclear-gravity-bomb-begins-new-production-phase/83742730007/

I was starting to worry we didn't have enough H-bombs.

But then I recalled this assessment:

https://starkrealities.substack.com/p/nuclear-deterrence-only-requires-dozens

I believe that our nuclear arsenal has been designed and stocked NOT for deterrence or defensive purposes but to WIN a first-strike nuclear war. Why else would it be so large?

And if you look at current US military capabilities compared to those of our "enemies" (i.e., Russia and China), the only thing that makes sense is that we fully intend to attack them with nuclear weapons.

See my next blog post for some supporting facts and assessments.