Noble Lothar Frey

Craster is a Stark

129 posts in this topic

If all the White Walkers needed were sacrificial material to raise the dead, then any human child would do.  And it wouldn't even need to be voluntary.  They can just seize a village full of the Free Folk and have all the sacrificial offerings they could want. Instead, they make a deal with Craster.  And instead of simply taking the babies by force they make a deal that would allow Craster to willingly give his boys.  Why?  Because they want to keep Craster alive so he can continue to provide them with his babies.  It's clear that Craster's DNA is very important to the white walkers.  Craster is special.  He's a Stark.

Edited by Heavy D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Heavy D said:

If all the White Walkers needed were sacrificial material to raise the dead, then any human child would do.  And it wouldn't even need to be voluntary.  They can just seize a village full of the Free Folk and have all the sacrificial offerings they could want. Instead, they make a deal with Craster. 

Easier said than done - the slightest touch of obsidian kills the Others. Furthermore, fire kills the wights almost instantly.

The Others may well be essentially immortal, so they've witnessed, in their lifetimes, how effectively the Night's Watch and the Children of the Forest fought them. They're wary of large human settlements.

Free Folk are mostly nomadic, too. There's nothing to say that the Others aren't already kidnapping other children. Craster is sedentary and offers his children willingly; it's not that the Others aren't taking other children it's just that Craster is the only ones we've seen due to limited POV North of the Wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Yukle said:

Easier said than done - the slightest touch of obsidian kills the Others. Furthermore, fire kills the wights almost instantly.

The Others may well be essentially immortal, so they've witnessed, in their lifetimes, how effectively the Night's Watch and the Children of the Forest fought them. They're wary of large human settlements.

Free Folk are mostly nomadic, too. There's nothing to say that the Others aren't already kidnapping other children. Craster is sedentary and offers his children willingly; it's not that the Others aren't taking other children it's just that Craster is the only ones we've seen due to limited POV North of the Wall.

Craster is a Stark.  That is why the white walkers want his male children.  There are thousands upon thousands of the Free Folk.  Perhaps over a million in the past 8000 years.  You would think the number of White Walkers would make the size of China's army look microscopic in comparison by now if anyone's child would do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2016 at 5:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

There is something special about Craster's bloodline because the Others accepted his boys. 

Are you sure?

On 12/3/2016 at 5:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

 Many wildlings would gladly make that sacrifice to satisfy the Others and keep them away and yet the Others do not accept their sacrifice. 

Who are these wildlings you speak of and what chapter of what book are they in?

On 12/3/2016 at 5:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

There would be no need for the wildlings to flee if they can keep the Others happy with the gift of an occasional baby boy.  So the baby's bloodline is clearly important.  The Others do not want just any male baby.

Craster makes the occasional baby sacrifice and it hasn't keep the others at bay. The wildlings are roaming all over the north beyond the wall. If it is that simple, the others would let the wildlings know and  sacrifices could be made. 

On 12/3/2016 at 5:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

The Night's King was a Stark. 

Or Bolton, a Magnar of Skagos, an Umber, a Flint, a Norrey, or a Woodfoot

On 12/3/2016 at 5:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

The female Other sought him out.  Why him in particular?  Because of his bloodline.  

Or because he was the absolute commander of the order that defeated her kin, if she was an other and not just a really pale woman 

 

On 12/3/2016 at 5:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

If the first white walkers were created from Stark stock, it would help explain why.  Only a Stark can be converted to a white walker.  The blood has to be compatible. 

 

If your theory is correct, the reason you suggest  could support the theory you came up with, yes. I would posit that since the stark line did not exist when the others invasion happened, and the potential founding stark, Bran the builder did not defeat them until a whole generation after the initial invasion, the starks could not be the stock from which the white walkers came from. 

Edited by Dorian Martell's son

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LordImp said:

Black blood is probably Nights watch . 

Yes, that's the literal reason it's said (twice, by two different characters) that his "blood is black". I believe it's also foreshadowing of a Craster/Lord Commander Hoare connection.

20 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

5 Out of our 14 PoVs have Starks blood. Sure Starks’ blood isn’t special.

Their blood is simply too common for the word "special" no matter. Tracking who has Stark blood isn't interesting because it turns out every noble family in the North has some. The idea that Craster has Stark blood is uninteresting for that reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Gilly or another of Craster's wives say that at first he sacrificed sheep, then it became sons?  I don't have the books handy but that never made sense if the sons are being turned into WWs.  Where are the sheep Others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Craster certainly has special blood and he is bound to sacrifice his sons. (or most of them).  However he is not alone in this and I think we will find Boltons also sacrifice their sons, although Bolton seems more fundamentally evil than Craster.

 

However you have got it all wrong about the Stark blood line. In the case of Craster it is the WOMEN who carry the genetic key (JUST as it is for the Targs).  That is why Craster marries his daughters and why the Targs all marry TARG women. It may also be the same for Starks but this is less clear.

Thinking about names Stark = Tarkaryan= Targaryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Craster is not a Stark . He is just a pervert . I'm pretty sure if he sacrificed his daughters to the Others .that they would be accepted .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Damon_Tor said:

Their blood is simply too common for the word "special" no matter. Tracking who has Stark blood isn't interesting because it turns out every noble family in the North has some. The idea that Craster has Stark blood is uninteresting for that reason.

 

2 hours ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

If your theory is correct, the reason you suggest  could support the theory you came up with, yes. I would posit that since the stark line did not exist when the others invasion happened, and the potential founding stark, Bran the builder did not defeat them until a whole generation after the initial invasion, the starks could not be the stock from which the white walkers came from. 

These are valid points. House Stark's rule over the North was in response to the Long Night. Therefore the Others existed before they did.

It was not until the 13th Lord Commander that the Others and the humans are known to have mixed (and this is assuming the story is true, or at least partly true).

5 hours ago, Heavy D said:

Craster is a Stark.  That is why the white walkers want his male children.  There are thousands upon thousands of the Free Folk.  Perhaps over a million in the past 8000 years.  You would think the number of White Walkers would make the size of China's army look microscopic in comparison by now if anyone's child would do.  

Except that there is no record of anyone other human voluntarily leaving out their children for the Others. A baby can survive only moments in the cold before dying. The Free Folk kill children afflicted with greyscale and don't name a baby until 2 - these both suggest high infant mortality. They haven't many children to spare - unlike Craster, whose unique circumstances have given him a large food surplus.

There's also the fact that the Others mostly live much further north than where Craster is. Their numbers don't seem to be huge, which is likely why they use wights to supplement their forces.

But their numbers aren't huge not due to ignoring the children of the Free Folk, but avoiding them out of caution. They wield fire and move about frequently, so it's no easy task to take their children. Whenever they'd come into contact, they'd likely kill the Free Folk, who mostly seem to culturally prefer fighting to pacifying. Most would likely kill their children before seeing the Others take them.

In fact, "The Others take you," is a rude curse that Ned is heard to use. So it's common knowledge that the Others take children - suggesting that it's not something unique to one pervert in a hut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yukle said:

"The Others take you," is a rude curse that Ned is heard to use. So it's common knowledge that the Others take children - suggesting that it's not something unique to one pervert in a hut.

This is something I tried a thread about years ago. The fact that this is a seemingly common curse makes me think that the Others taking children during the Long Night was something which happened in general. Which indeed sets a slightly different light on Craster, maybe there is something special about his blood and this explains his sick rape of his daughters, you know pure blood lines and all that, But I rather suspect that he's just doing what most abusers do, and picking on the most easily controlled victims. ie: his own children. 

The giving of his sons to the Others is something which as yet we have very little insight into. I suspect only really Gilly can answer that one now. Unless one of his other daughters shows up at the wall at some point. But IIRC most of them were killed? yes. But there were 19 including Gilly, so maybe one or more has survived? We may get some information in TWOW as to what he was up to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Yukle said:

Maybe?

I think they're connected to the magic of the Old Gods somehow. I can envisage there being a distant Stark ancestor who betrayed the Night's Watch and tried to use the magic of the Old Gods for personal gain or something, becoming the first of the Others.

If I had to bet, I'd say that it was a human who made the first white walker but I certainly wouldn't bet my own money nor with any confidence. :P 

There couldn't really have been someone betraying the Nightswatch to become the first other. The Nightswatch was formed to fight the others, so must have been formed after the Others came into existence.

Spoiler

I am afraid that the origin of the Others have been "spoiled" by the show. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/12/2016 at 1:34 AM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

There is something special about Craster's bloodline because the Others accepted his boysMany wildlings would gladly make that sacrifice to satisfy the Others and keep them away and yet the Others do not accept their sacrifice.  There would be no need for the wildlings to flee if they can keep the Others happy with the gift of an occasional baby boy.  So the baby's bloodline is clearly important.  The Others do not want just any male baby.

The Night's King was a Stark.  The female Other sought him out.  Why him in particular?  Because of his bloodline.  If the first white walkers were created from Stark stock, it would help explain why.  Only a Stark can be converted to a white walker.  The blood has to be compatible. 

 

The Others accept his boys because he offers them.  If they kill Caster and his wives then they get no more boys.  The Others are simply smart enough to understand this and allow the baby farm to continue to operate and produce a reliable crop for them: 19 wives, a lot of whom are of child bearing age could mean a few "harvests" every year.

Why do you think parents would "gladly" sacrifice their children?  Most parents would fight to the death to protect their children so I think you have this backwards.  Of course we don't know if other wildlings have adopted this practice but Craster seems in a unique position, an alpha male with no rivals to contest his rule or stand up to him and a ready made way of ensuring he is left in peace and that any potential challengers are removed from the equation.  If Tormund or the Magnar decided to sacrifice children I think the free folk would have a thing or two to say about that and mostly with their axes.

We have no idea how many babies the Others acquire or how many they want or need.  All we know is that they and Craster have a mutually beneficial relationship that does not in any way require Craster to be a Stark.

Why do you think the first white walkers were created from Stark stock?  The Long Night occurred, the white walkers appeared, the Last Hero saved the day, then the Wall was made, the Night's Watch created and the stories of the Night's King mating with a female other follow after that.  The WW predate the Stark = NK producing baby Others idea.  There is nothing to say the WW are created from a particular human bloodline and that "only Starks" can be "converted" into WW.  And that's one hell of a curse to lay on a family!  So we should kill all Starks and the WW are neutralised? I can't see that being how this is going......

14 hours ago, Seams said:

This was explored in brief in this thread:

In brief:

So I agree with the speculation that Craster is deliberately maintaining a pure bloodline for the sacrifices or for some other reason.

And this, from further down in that same thread:

The other wordplay that seems significant comes in a Jon POV where we meet a northern lord who is known as The Norrey, instead of Lord Norrey, like all the other lords. Could this be "norrth eye"? Or, at least, some kind of allusion to Torrhen Stark. (If "Torrhen Stark" is an anagram, could it be "north" + "Kraster"? As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I think Craster is a splinter line from House Stark.)

Or no other wildlng would tolerate him sacrificing their blood relatives or descendants so he has no choice.

The wordplay doesn't really work though.  Craster =/= Stark or Torrhen Stark.  There is not a clue here.

11 hours ago, aryagonnakill#2 said:

I don't think the WW's are re-animated corpses, whatever they are, it is my personal opinion that the babies are sacrificed by the WW's for the ability to raise the wights.  I believe this because of the often repeated phrase only death can pay for life, and because of what Mirri Maz Dur seems to do with Drago.  She sacrifices Danys baby and raises a catatonic Drago, as we learn from Bran and Varamyr Six Skins, a catatonic person is easily skinchanged and controlled.  We see that the blue light of the wights eyes go's out before they stop moving when burned, I think the light is a sign of the control of the WW's are exercising over them.

There is a single piece of evidence from the books to suggest the babies are turned into WW's, and that is from one of Crastors daughter wives who says to Sam "the sons are coming".  However since she would not have any reason/ability to know this I personally discredit it and go for what we saw MMD do.

IIRC she says, (sic) "You should leave now.  They'll be here soon, his brothers".  That is a pretty strong hint from the author and although we can dismiss her as an ignorant and superstitious peasant I don't think we should.  There is afer all something non-human which takes the male children away and she knows how this deal works much better than we do.  We know virtually nothing about the Others so what would be the point of this misdirection from GRRM?

11 hours ago, Heavy D said:

If all the White Walkers needed were sacrificial material to raise the dead, then any human child would do.  And it wouldn't even need to be voluntary.  They can just seize a village full of the Free Folk and have all the sacrificial offerings they could want. Instead, they make a deal with Craster.  And instead of simply taking the babies by force they make a deal that would allow Craster to willingly give his boys.  Why?  Because they want to keep Craster alive so he can continue to provide them with his babies.  It's clear that Craster's DNA is very important to the white walkers.  Craster is special.  He's a Stark.

We don't know how they raise the dead.  Something raised Othor and Jafar Flowers or Small Paul or Tormund's son Torwyn the Tame.  I don't believe they need to take a life to raise a wight, let alone kill  a Stark-blooded-human to raise a wight.  Given the number of wights it can't work like that.  And Thoros raised Beric 6/7 times without any blood sacrifice or death occuring to pay for Beric's life.

The Free Folk are fleeing south though.  That is the plot in ACOK/ASOS and we are quite clearly told: "first they kill you, then they send your dead against you".  The Others don't seem to want co-existence and the wildilngs in general, like most humans, aren't too keen on sacrificing their children.  Until we know how many human children they want and for what purpose there is nothing particularly remarkable about Craster except he is prepared to hand over his children without fighting, allowing for a smooth operation of the baby farm for purposes as yet unknown.

10 hours ago, Heavy D said:

Craster is a Stark.  That is why the white walkers want his male children.  There are thousands upon thousands of the Free Folk.  Perhaps over a million in the past 8000 years.  You would think the number of White Walkers would make the size of China's army look microscopic in comparison by now if anyone's child would do.  

But we don't know how active they have been for the last 8000 years, why they are active now and what they want the children for.  The idea that one human bloodline somehow determines the fate of the Others seems pretty prone to failure.  Again, kill all Starks, or the Starks die out and the WWs die out too.  It can't be that simple or mundane.

6 hours ago, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

Craster is not a Stark . He is just a pervert . I'm pretty sure if he sacrificed his daughters to the Others .that they would be accepted .

Quite possibly.  But if you work in animal husbandry you keep all the breeding females but you don't need more than one breeding male and that seems to be how it operates here.  The obvious point is that when Craster dies the breeding program ends so it would have made sense from the Others to allow or force Craster to keep one son.

The fact that they don't and aren't too bothered about his bloodline perpetuating itself beyond his death seems to show that he is not in fact significant at all and it's merely opportunism on the part of the WW.  The set-up is the easiest way for them to acquire human children rather than the essential way to acquire the "special" children they are alleged to so desperately need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, maudisdottir said:

Didn't Gilly or another of Craster's wives say that at first he sacrificed sheep, then it became sons?  I don't have the books handy but that never made sense if the sons are being turned into WWs.  Where are the sheep Others?

She said that sometimes they came and he had no sons to give so he would give goats or sheep or whatever.

This can be interpreted in 2 ways.  The way I interpret it that it is merely for a sacrifice and while a child is worth more a goat is still a valuable item to the person giving it up and it is still a life.  Others have said it is simply a way to Craster to say that the deal is still on even though he has no sons to give them now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

The Others accept his boys because he offers them.  If they kill Caster and his wives then they get no more boys.  The Others are simply smart enough to understand this and allow the baby farm to continue to operate and produce a reliable crop for them: 19 wives, a lot of whom are of child bearing age could mean a few "harvests" every year.

Why do you think parents would "gladly" sacrifice their children?  Most parents would fight to the death to protect their children so I think you have this backwards.  Of course we don't know if other wildlings have adopted this practice but Craster seems in a unique position, an alpha male with no rivals to contest his rule or stand up to him and a ready made way of ensuring he is left in peace and that any potential challengers are removed from the equation.  If Tormund or the Magnar decided to sacrifice children I think the free folk would have a thing or two to say about that and mostly with their axes.

We have no idea how many babies the Others acquire or how many they want or need.  All we know is that they and Craster have a mutually beneficial relationship that does not in any way require Craster to be a Stark.

Why do you think the first white walkers were created from Stark stock?  The Long Night occurred, the white walkers appeared, the Last Hero saved the day, then the Wall was made, the Night's Watch created and the stories of the Night's King mating with a female other follow after that.  The WW predate the Stark = NK producing baby Others idea.  There is nothing to say the WW are created from a particular human bloodline and that "only Starks" can be "converted" into WW.  And that's one hell of a curse to lay on a family!  So we should kill all Starks and the WW are neutralised? I can't see that being how this is going......

Or no other wildlng would tolerate him sacrificing their blood relatives or descendants so he has no choice.

The wordplay doesn't really work though.  Craster =/= Stark or Torrhen Stark.  There is not a clue here.

IIRC she says, (sic) "You should leave now.  They'll be here soon, his brothers".  That is a pretty strong hint from the author and although we can dismiss her as an ignorant and superstitious peasant I don't think we should.  There is afer all something non-human which takes the male children away and she knows how this deal works much better than we do.  We know virtually nothing about the Others so what would be the point of this misdirection from GRRM?

We don't know how they raise the dead.  Something raised Othor and Jafar Flowers or Small Paul or Tormund's son Torwyn the Tame.  I don't believe they need to take a life to raise a wight, let alone kill  a Stark-blooded-human to raise a wight.  Given the number of wights it can't work like that.  And Thoros raised Beric 6/7 times without any blood sacrifice or death occuring to pay for Beric's life.

The Free Folk are fleeing south though.  That is the plot in ACOK/ASOS and we are quite clearly told: "first they kill you, then they send your dead against you".  The Others don't seem to want co-existence and the wildilngs in general, like most humans, aren't too keen on sacrificing their children.  Until we know how many human children they want and for what purpose there is nothing particularly remarkable about Craster except he is prepared to hand over his children without fighting, allowing for a smooth operation of the baby farm for purposes as yet unknown.

But we don't know how active they have been for the last 8000 years, why they are active now and what they want the children for.  The idea that one human bloodline somehow determines the fate of the Others seems pretty prone to failure.  Again, kill all Starks, or the Starks die out and the WWs die out too.  It can't be that simple or mundane.

Quite possibly.  But if you work in animal husbandry you keep all the breeding females but you don't need more than one breeding male and that seems to be how it operates here.  The obvious point is that when Craster dies the breeding program ends so it would have made sense from the Others to allow or force Craster to keep one son.

The fact that they don't and aren't too bothered about his bloodline perpetuating itself beyond his death seems to show that he is not in fact significant at all and it's merely opportunism on the part of the WW.  The set-up is the easiest way for them to acquire human children rather than the essential way to acquire the "special" children they are alleged to so desperately need.

I can't say why, all I can say is what I have already said, everything we have seen with magic seems to involve sacrifice, only death can pay for life.  While Thoros does not die to give Thoros his life, he is in fact diminished, and tells Beric that if he tries to revive him a 7th time he would die.  While I cannot say that Beric is 1/7th of his former self, he does not heal as drago did when the baby was sacrificed and he does not get all of his memories back.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Black Crow said:

We don't. Old Nan tells Bran that he was a Stark, and its plausible, but at this point we don't know for certain.

That was my point.

8 hours ago, Damon_Tor said:

Their blood is simply too common for the word "special" no matter. Tracking who has Stark blood isn't interesting because it turns out every noble family in the North has some. The idea that Craster has Stark blood is uninteresting for that reason.

That doesn't make sense. By your logic no bloodline is unique. The Valyrians had colonized the whole of Essos, the First men and the Andals were from Essos and so on. If anything the Iron Borns’ blood is common too since there were way too many children with rock wives and salt wives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 8:34 PM, Lame Lothar Frey said:

There is something special about Craster's bloodline because the Others accepted his boys.  Many wildlings would gladly make that sacrifice to satisfy the Others and keep them away and yet the Others do not accept their sacrifice.  There would be no need for the wildlings to flee if they can keep the Others happy with the gift of an occasional baby boy.  So the baby's bloodline is clearly important.  The Others do not want just any male baby.

The Night's King was a Stark.  The female Other sought him out.  Why him in particular?  Because of his bloodline.  If the first white walkers were created from Stark stock, it would help explain why.  Only a Stark can be converted to a white walker.  The blood has to be compatible. 

 

I think this is exactly right and it goes back to a conversation that was on forum about the origins of house start, the kings of winter and the white walkers. A theory that I floated was that Brandon of the Bloody Blade, after his pretty much wholesale slaughter of the COTF, was captured and made into the first walker. His son, Bran the Builder, on top of all the other stuff he built, built the pact with the COTF to create a peace and end the long night.

 

This pact, however, had a sanguine punishment aspect. Bran and all of his heirs (the Kings of Winter) would have to sacrifice their souls upon their death. They would never be allowed to become part of the collective that is the old gods and passes through the weirnet but rather have their souls imprisoned. First men burial customs were to burry in barrows at the bottom of weirwoods (the way bones are scattered at bloodraves weirwood) so that the souls could become one with everything. The fact that the kings of winter were entombed with a sword on their lap to keep their "vengeful spirits" in seems to be some kind of pomp for the King but is really more of a punishment when you think of First Men beliefs.

The theory goes on to suggest that these vengeful spirits of old kings have been escaping for some time (Craster has been sacrificing for 3 generations now). Whether this is because Torrhen kneeling broke the line of kings (which is what I think) and in breaking the line of kings the pact with the children was invalidated which would explain why the first keep and older parts of Winterfell built with the children's magic by bran are falling apart....the kings in the oldest part of the crypts have escaped as the swords are no longer on the laps and they are, in fact, the walkers. Another reasonable idea is that this is something that was passed from lord to heir in unbroken succession and that the kings sacrifice was never made public and because Rickard and Brandon were killed the secret of this deal died with them, but I don't think this works out as well with the time line.

 

It would seem that Craster, whether he knows it or not, is keeping up the Stark side of the agreement made by Bran the Builder to pay for the crimes of Brandon of the Bloody Blade which is what keeps him safe but that safety applies only to his own "kingdom" north of the wall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, maudisdottir said:

Didn't Gilly or another of Craster's wives say that at first he sacrificed sheep, then it became sons?  I don't have the books handy but that never made sense if the sons are being turned into WWs.  Where are the sheep Others?

Its the other way around:

“He gives the boys to the gods. Come the white cold he does, and of late it comes more often. That’s why he started giving them sheep, even though he has a taste for it. Only now the sheep are gone too. Next it will be dogs, till…”

She lowered her eyes and stroked her belly.

“What gods?” Jon was remembering they’d seen no boys in Craster’s keep, nor men either, save Craster himself.

“The cold gods,” she said. “The ones in the night. The white shadows.”

And Craster is a godly man who keeps right with his gods. Given that the other free folk [and the rangers] know what's going on but conspicuously don't come visiting with pitchforks, flaming torches, etc. I'm inclined to see Craster as something akin to a sin-eater. He is despised, but tolerated and even indulged because through giving up his sons, their own are safe and when the cold winds rise the white shadows don't come knocking on their doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that Craster is an abomination. Despised by the free folk and tolerated by the NW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

I was under the impression that Craster is an abomination. Despised by the free folk and tolerated by the NW.

They despise him certainly, but make no attempt to do anything about him, which is a major reason why I'm suggesting he's the equivalent of a sin eater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Black Crow said:

They despise him certainly, but make no attempt to do anything about him, which is a major reason why I'm suggesting he's the equivalent of a sin eater

ole Black Crow you have my highest esteem, I was flippantly making a remark no harm intended and I had to go google sin eater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now