The DEA first detained Chong when they raided a house he was hanging out at on 4/20. The house had more than 18,000 ecstasy tablets but the DEA admits Chong had nothing to do with the drugs. After he was detained he was supposed to be released, one officer even offered him a ride back home.
Then from his 5 foot by 5 foot enclosure [I've read elsewhere that it was 5x10] he was forgotten about for five days. He could hear DEA agents on the outside of the heavy door, they either didn’t hear him or didn’t care. He had no food, water or a bathroom.from Pothead Held and Forgotten By DEA Drank Own Urine To Survive
I think it's safe to say that those whom Chong could hear talking could hear him shouting and pounding, and that the DEA's insinuation that they could not hear him is a LIE. Where it the FBI on this? Why hasn't anyone been arrested on suspicion of torture? There's no lack of reason to suspect that he was deliberately tortured. Where are those segments of the media that tout their fearlessness to ask "the tough questions?"
The referenced article's headline might provide a clue as to why Chong was singled out for SRA by some of Crowley's followers, would-be Nietzschean "supermen," hiding as usual behind the skirts of some organization with lots of power over people's lives: he's a "pothead." So, this might mean that his torturers regarded him as a subhuman, as a member of the "slave" class, which can be abused with impunity. This might also explain why the "war on drugs" concentrates on incarcerating and abusing drug users, when if they wanted to be more effective they would go after the banks and movie theaters that launder huge amounts of drug profits (thus explaining the record box-office figures even as the economy barely muddles along).
The name of the above-referenced publication, The Inquisitr, implies intense scrutiny, and yet I see no evidence of such scrutiny in this article. In fact, it tries to explain the lack of response to Chong's noise-making by mentioning that the door to the room is "heavy," but the fact remains that he could hear people merely talking on the other side. If they're deaf, why were they talking? Obviously, they heard him, and yet the DEA expects us to believe that nobody knew he was there. Are the perpetrators going to get away with torture with a transparent lie?