US Government Investing $22 Million To Develop ‘SMART ePants,’ Surveillance-Based Underwear And Fabrics

The Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), the intelligence correlative to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), is managing these “Smart Electrically Powered and Networked Textile Systems” (SMART).

According to the IARPA’s website,

The SMART ePANTS program seeks to develop clothing with integrated audio, video, and geolocation sensor systems that feature the same stretchability, bendability, washability, and comfort of regular textiles. By weaving these devices directly into garments, Intelligence Community staff will be able to record information from their environment hands-free, without the need to wear uncomfortable, bulky, and rigid devices. As a result, personnel will have greater range of motion, thus improving their response time in challenging circumstances.

The SMART ePANTS goal is to build sensor systems that are comfortably integrated into primary clothing (e.g., shirts, pants, socks, and underwear). Research committed to developing these systems will be divided into three demonstration tracks: Audio recording; Video and photography capture; Indoor geolocation

According to a press release from the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), SMART ePANTS Program Manager, Dr. Dawson Cagle, said in a statement:

IARPA is proud to lead this first-of-its-kind effort for both the IC and broader scientific community which will bring much-needed innovation to the field of ASTs. To date no group has committed the time and resources necessary to fashion the first integrated electronics that are stretchable, bendable, comfortable, and washable like regular clothing.

https://youtu.be/hJWRpAEife8

A lot of the IARPA and DARPA programs are like throwing spaghetti against the refrigerator. It may or may not stick.

They’re now in a position of serious authority over you. In TSA, they can swab your hands for explosives. Now suppose SMART ePANTS detects a chemical on your skin — imagine where that can lead.

Annie Jacobsen, author of a book about DARPA, reported by The Intercept

In a recent op-ed by former Fox News host Judge Andrew Napolitano, the Judge said that 11 years ago he tried to publish a piece at Fox that highlighted the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) ability be in American’s kitchens remotely, with a factitious title that made his bosses scorn the piece, even though what he discussed (and is public knowledge) that the CIA discovered the ability to remotely hack into computer chips embedded in microwaves and dishwashers, granting the CIA the ability to listen in and track what is going on in unknowing American’s kitchens.

Now Napolitano contends the CIA is trying to do this again in another former, in his piece, “Is the CIA in Your Underwear?” He laments the absurdity of this and how it is again another way the Constitution is being downtrodden, and elected representatives turn a blind eye to this. He writes (excerpts):

---

Not long ago, I was challenged to a public debate at the Conservative Political Action Conference by [CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus] who was then the head of the National Security Agency, the CIA’s domestic surveillance cousin. The topic of the debate was whether domestic warrantless spying is constitutional. I accepted the challenge and aggressively pressed the general on the notorious lack of fidelity that the 17 federal spying agencies have for the Constitution in general, and specifically the Fourth Amendment.

The general gave me two answers, both of which would have flunked a bar examination. First, he argued that the Fourth Amendment only protects against unreasonable surveillance, and his 60,000 domestic spies were behaving reasonably. After the laughter died down, I pointed out that the Supreme Court has held that all searches and seizures — all surveillance — conducted without search warrants are as a matter of law unreasonable, and thus violative of the amendment.

Then he retreated to a post-9/11 argument crafted by the Department of Justice in the George W. Bush administration. That argument offers that the Fourth Amendment only restrains law enforcement; it does not restrain the intelligence community. I pointed out that this view is defied by both language and history.

The plain language of the amendment has no exceptions to it. Rather, it protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.”

I then reminded him — we were friends, mind you; but I could not let him get away with publicly trashing the document he and I had both sworn to preserve, protect and defend — that the Fourth Amendment was written in the aftermath of British intelligence agents breaking down the doors of colonists’ homes ostensibly looking for compliance with the Stamp Act of 1765 but really looking for subversive materials by folks whom today we call the Founding Fathers.

I present this brief background so as to offer a flavor for the mindset of the feds who spy on us and to address the latest craze among senior level intelligence folks in the Biden administration.

Last week, the Director of National Intelligence — she is the nominal head of all 17 federal surveillance agencies — revealed to Congress that she had spent $22 million in order to develop cotton fibers that she called smart clothing. The fibers will enable the CIA and other federal spies to record audio, video and geolocation data from your shirt, pants, socks and even your underwear. She billed this as the largest single investment ever made to develop Smart ePants.

Smarty pants — how appropriate is that name for federal intrusion? Smarty pants is the jerk who can’t stop talking and won’t change the subject.

The CIA does not directly develop its ability to connect to your kitchen microwave and dishwasher or your socks and underwear. Rather, it hires outside groups to do so. In the case of smarty pants, 28 American tech firms and laboratories have helped to develop this monstrosity. Most are not household names, but some are — like the University of Virginia (which is owned by the state of Virginia), Penn State (which is owned by the state of Pennsylvania) and DuPont (which owns most of the state of Delaware).

You can’t make this stuff up. The federal government’s appetite for surveillance is quite literally insatiable. And its respect for the individual natural right to be left alone is nonexistent. It traffics in evading and avoiding the Constitution, using absurd and puerile arguments that have never been accepted by the courts, even though every single federal employee has sworn an oath of fidelity to the Constitution as it is generally understood and interpreted.

When the DNI told Congress about this — while Congress was on its summer break — not a peep was heard from anyone in Congress or from the sleepy White House for whom the DNI works.

Does the government work for us, or do we work for the government? What employee gets to spy on his bosses by putting trick textiles into the bosses’ underwear and then gets away with it? When will Congress protect our liberties? When will enough of this warrantless spying be enough?

---

AUTHOR COMMENTARY

No, it won’t stop, Mr. Napolitano, and it never will; for as long as the people tolerate this nonsense, and passively accept more trifling of their and each other’s rights and liberties, and praise and celebrate abomination while despising truth and righteousness, the oppressive government and loss of trivial freedom and privacy will only increase at blistering speeds

For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.

Proverbs 28:2

There is nothing “smart” about these pants, and only a complete dummy would ever think to wear this nonsense – which means Americans will line up for this per the latest fashion trend some deadbeat celebrity pushes, if this ever gets pushed commercially.

---

[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).

The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE