Crystal Reports 1099: Fill & Download for Free

I look around the office and see what kind of place it is. One thing I look for is how badly worn the carpet, furniture and walls are. Visible damage that isn’t being dealt with is a probable sign that they don’t give out raises very often.What I walk in with as a salary might be the same as what I walk out with even if I’m there a few years.It also tells me something about them not being well run enough to make maintenance a priority.I look at the faces and demeanor of the people. In six months, I’m going to have this demeanor. Am I okay with that? Depression, anger, fear, and obvious stress lines are giveaways.I always look to see if people are in clothes that are “corporate uniform in disguise”. If I pass by cubes I look to see how dark it is to work there. If I see things that are locked up by staff, that’s a big red flag.If during discussion, the numbers aren’t matching between hourly and annual wages then I dig. If there are more discrepancies I start backing away.I know, for example, that if someone is making $50/hr that that translates to about 100k/year. The relationship is pretty easy to remember, since the number of working hours in a “man year” are 2000. (If you are not on w2 but being treated as a business contracting with them, you have to pay for more things so $50/hr is 50k/year.)I had a person tell me that their job would be paying $60/hr and that would be 100k, annual. Which means the math wasn’t right so a fact was missing or they were confused or lying.When confronted, they said nothing. BIG red flag.Any lies that are obvious are a bad sign. Any pattern of lies is a signal to start eyeing the possible exits.I remember one where I kept insisting that they had to buy the equipment; a laptop and crystal reports. The problems with me bringing my own tools are numerous but include that I would have to get my machine to talk to their network and in that case that they couldn’t run the reports if they didn’t have a copy. All my other clients at that time had not only no trouble with that, but insisted that I use their equipment and their copy of crystal.They pushed back, insisted I work on 1099 not w2, and lowballed the price. All red flags.I got lucky and found another job while we were doing the back and forth. I think if I’d worked for them they would have stiffed me. Their product never hit the market and I suspect they were scammers.At some point, the things going on in the conversation start to add up to a bad feeling. I listen for that gut feeling and have been pulled out of some bad situations because of it.I recommend you listen to your gut on that too.Somewhere I have a list of red flags for a project. I should probably write up one for jobs as well, but that’s a much more vast list.

While the total amount earned from each side job may not obligate the payor to issue you an IRS Form 1099 statement, I cannot imagine how you would be able to avoid reporting your overall income and paying taxes based on the total earned income. I recommend that you work with a certified tax preparer to discuss this situation.

“The Crusades” lasted at least 200 years and included a large number of distinctly different military campaigns from the First Crusade, that re-established Christian control over the Holy Land in 1099, to the tragic last crusades of St. Louis in the third quarter of the 13th century. Yet the one larger-than-life historical figure associated with the crusades must be Richard the Lionheart, King of England, who participated in the Third Crusade 1191–1192.Richard was only one of the leaders of the largely successful Third Crusade, but it was his sound strategic leadership combined with dramatic personal courage that made him stand-out as “the” leader of this crusade. (For more on Richard generally see: The Legendary - and Controversial - Richard the Lionheart)To illustrate his strategic leadership let me draw attention to Richard’s usually overlooked diplomatic initiatives during the Third Crusade and as evidence of his personal courage and tactical competence I will describe two battles from the Third Crusade, the Battle of Arsuf and the Battle of Jaffa.Diplomacy of the Third CrusadeThe Third Crusade was the first (but not the last) of the crusades that ended with a truce, and as such was concluded diplomatically rather than militarily. It is as a result an interesting case-study in diplomacy at the interface between Christendom and the Dar al-Islam. It is particularly interesting because the principle actors, Richard the Lionheart and Salah ad-Din, are more famous as men of war then men of peace.The political objectives of the Third Crusade were crystal clear: the restoration of Christian rule over the Holy Land. The later was defined roughly as the land in which Christ had lived and died, most especially the site of his execution, burial and resurrection: Jerusalem. All the crusaders that embarked upon the Third Crusade understood this as their goal ― and Saladin knew it. His political objective was quite simply to defend the status quo: Muslim control over the territory coveted by the crusaders.Notably, Richard initiated the diplomatic contacts with his enemies after his successes at Acre and Arsuf. He did not turn to diplomacy only at the last minute or in desperation. Yet throughout the diplomatic maneuvering, Saladin retained the upper hand simply because it was clear that at some point Richard and his army would sail back to the West leaving Saladin with his much larger forces in place to attack again.It is, therefore, significant that despite negotiating from weakness, Richard the Lionheart managed to strike a deal that ended the Third Crusade with a compromise. For the details on how these results were achieved see: Diplomacy of the Third Crusade Part I and Diplomacy of the Third Crusade As a footnote, the curious diplomatic exchange concerning a possible marriage between Richard’s sister and Saladin’s brother is handled in: An Inter-faith Marriage to end the Third CrusadeBattle of ArsufOn August 25, the crusader army set out from Acre under the overall command of King Richard of England. The eventual goal was an assault on Jerusalem, but Richard wisely chose to follow the coastal route as far as Jaffa (the closest port to Jerusalem) rather than striking inland. This meant that the crusaders had one flank "anchored" on the seaward side and only had to fear attack from landward. Furthermore, Richard's fleet sailed down the coast, keeping pace with the army as it advanced. The fleet carried food, fodder, supplies, and munition, while also offering a safe place for the wounded to receive rest and medical care.On the other hand, the Sultan's forces controlled the entire interior of the country and could move and deploy at will, which meant they could attack at the time and the place of their choosing. As a result, the crusaders had to advance in battle formation, prepared to fight every foot of the way south. King Richard organized his forces using a variant of standard crusader tactics. Namely, he placed the baggage train on his right flank, next to the sea (which was controlled by his fleet), placed the knights to the east/left of the baggage train, and the infantry on the outside, eastern/left flank of the entire formation. The infantry could thus protect the vulnerable horses of the knights, while the entire formation advanced steadily at the pace of the infantry -- until the moment came for the knights to deliver a knock-out charge.After harassing the crusaders with hit-and-run raids throughout the march, Saladin drew up his forces en masse on September 7, when the crusaders were still a short day's march from the ruined city of Arsuf. The crusaders realized that they were about to face more than the harassing tactics of the previous days. Richard, however, remained determined to continue the march. He gave very clear orders for the knights not to charge the enemy until he gave a trumpet signal from the van, center and rear at the same time. He did not want the power of the Frankish charge dissipated in uncoordinated attacks, and he reserved the exclusive right to decide if and when it was right to loose the heavy cavalry that was the Frank's best offensive weapon.The Sultan ordered the attack at 9 am, after the Franks had already been marching for several hours and he appears to have hoped he could break through the Frankish line, separating the van, led and commanded by the Templars, from the center, nominally under the command of Guy de Lusignan. The Frankish cavalry, however, did not respond to the provocation and by noon parts of the advance guard had reached the well-watered orchards north of Arsuf, the designated camping ground for that day of march.By now, however, the Saracens were focusing their attacks more upon the rear guard than the van and center, trying to slow it down enough to cut it off and annihilate it. By mid-afternoon the situation in the rear-guard (which on this particular day was held by the Hospitallers) became desperate. More knights were walking than riding. The Master of the Hospital rode forward to Richard of England pleading for permission to attack before all the horses were slaughtered. Richard said 'no.'Returning to the rear, the Master of the Hospitallers found that his men were now pressed so hotly that they were marching backwards. For a second time the Master of the Hospital rode forward to Richard to beg for permission to attack. The answer remained the same.Then, without warning and certainly without the sounding of trumpets, the Marshal of the Hospital broke out of the ranks of the crusaders charging at the Saracens shouting "St. George." He was promptly joined by a knight from Champagne, and then all along the whole line the cavalry broke through the infantry screen.The Itinerarium (a pro-Richard account of the crusade) makes much of the fact that Richard had not ordered the attack and so it was mistimed. Other scholars have followed his argument that the decisive victory that might otherwise have been achieved -- if only the undisciplined (!) Hospitallers had waited for Richard's signal -- slipped through the fingers of the crusaders.The Saracen eye-witness Baha ad-Din, on the other hand, describes the Frankish charge as superbly timed and well-coordinated. Certainly, claims that King Richard could have won a decisive victory are ill-informed. Saladin's troops had complete freedom of movement and infinite space to withdraw and regroup. The terrain on the coastal plain of the Levant was not suitable for pinning down and trapping an enemy -- unless it was pinned against the sea, which was where the crusaders, not the Saracens, were. In other words, only Saladin had a chance of eliminating his enemies in a single crushing blow; the best the crusaders could hope to achieve was survival in tact as a fighting force.This is exactly what they did achieve. The effect of the charge led by the Hospitaller Marshal and supported promptly by other (though not all) cavalry contingents of the crusader line was to throw the enemy back with very heavy losses. Indeed, the Muslim sources stress that Saladin’s army fled in complete panic and was completely routed. King Richard, however, wisely stopped any pursuit by his Frankish knights, rallying the crusader cavalry to resume their position inside the infantry shield and proceed toward Arsuf.The Battle of Arsuf was thus a significant Christian victory and a serious blow to Saladin's prestige. He had committed his whole army (Syrians, Egyptians, Turks, Kurds, Nubians and Bedouins were all engaged), and he had singularly failed to repeat the success of Hattin. He had neither crushed the crusading fighting forces nor halted their advance. In this sense, Arsuf was more a Saracen defeat than a Christian victory.But Saladin also notably rallied his troops and elite units were able to launch no less than two more attacks on the Christian rear even after main body of troops had been routed. While these attacks were also driven off by King Richard and his knights, they clearly demonstrate that Saracen morale had not broken.For more details see: Battle of Arsuf, Third Crusade.Also, the Battle of Arsuf is an important episode in Envoy of Jerusalem.Battle of JaffaHaving seized control of Jaffa on August 1 with a small landing force of 55 knights and 2,000 crossbowmen, Richard I was faced with the difficult task of holding onto the city until the main army of Jerusalem could arrive. The garrison had numbered roughly 3,000 men, but many had died or been wounded in the three day siege. More important, the walls had been undermined and breached, making the city itself indefensible. Furthermore, the slaughter and plundering carried out during the brief Saracen occupation had left the Franks without wine and short of other supplies as well; the entire pig population had been slaughtered and very likely the cattle, sheep and goats (animals valuable to the Saracens) had been driven off as part of the loot. Least pleasant of all, there were hundreds of rotting corpses in the city that would soon cause the spread of disease.Furthermore, Saladin’s army was still very much intact; it simply needed to regroup. The Franks at once set about “repairing” the breach in the wall, but without mortar this could only be considered an improvised and unsatisfactory measure. At the same time, the Christian dead were collected and given a Christian burial, while the Saracen dead were dumped in a mass grave with the pig carcasses. Despite these efforts, the city was evidently uninhabitable because Richard chose to erect his tent outside the city walls.Meanwhile, Saladin had pulled his forces back only a few miles and was rapidly regrouping. As the surprise of the unexpected amphibious assault wore off, and it became clear that they had been routed by what was little more than a handful of knights with supporting infantry, shame started to set in. The Saracen scouts reported back that that King Richard was camped outside of Jaffa with just a few men. The plan was soon conceived to launch a counter-attack against the Franks, and on the night of August 4 the Sultan led his troops back toward Jaffa.Just as dawn was breaking on the morning of August 5, a “certain Genoese” went out into the countryside (presumably following the call of nature) and was surprised to hear “the noise of travelers and the clattering of horses walking.”[1] Rushing back to the Frankish camp, he gave the alarm. The enemy was so near, however, that no one had time to properly arm or even dress. “As a result the king himself and a great many others in confusion and urgency of the moment advanced barelegged to battle, some even without underpants.”[2] They took their shields and lances, however, and established a shield wall with the knights down on one knee holding the shield upright on their left arm and the lance with the butt embedded in the soil to their right, thrust forward toward the enemy. Pairs of crossbowmen took up positions between the knights and fired in relays.The Arab chronicler Baha al-Din was personally present at the capture of Jaffa and during Richard I’s successful assault on August 1. Although absent from this engagement on August 5, he was privy to the first-hand accounts of many who were present and he describes the opening of the engagement as follows:[The Sultan and his troops] crossed the open country and came by the morning upon the enemy’s tents. He found them to be few, about ten in number. The Sultan was filled with eager anticipation and his men charged them as one man, but the enemy stood firm and did not move from their positions. Like dogs of war they snarled, willing to fight to the death. Our troops were frightened of them, dumbfounded by their steadfastness…. [T]he number of their cavalry was estimated at the most at seventeen and at the least as nine and their foot were less than 1,000. Some said 300 and others more than that.[3]According to the Itinerarium, the Turkish mounted archers made multiple attacks, but the horses refused to impale themselves on the lances and turned and fled at the last moment. Meanwhile, the crossbows took a heavy toll of man and horse. Because of the large numbers of enemy, however, the attacks kept coming relentlessly and the air was filled with whirling dust.Eventually, someone on the Frankish side scrounged together about a dozen horses. These were not warhorses, not the knight’s destriers trained for battle, but the dregs left behind when the Saracens looted Jaffa, taking the best horseflesh with them. Nevertheless, King Richard took the best of the horses found, the Earl of Leicester another and some of his knights the rest. Numbering at most 17 (as Baha al-Din attests) they charged into the vastly greater number of Saracen.The Itinerarium records that the Earl of Leicester was thrown from his horse—but King Richard brought him a Turkish horse and protected him while he remounted. Shortly afterwards another of Richard’s knights was unhorsed and the Turks started to drag him off a prisoner—but King Richard rode to his rescue. The little band of Frankish knights was killing and holding their own, but were lost from view to the men on the shield wall by the mass of Saracens surrounding them and the increasing dust.Fearing the King was lost, some of the crossbowmen and garrison lost their nerve. They broke ranks and rushed down to the galleys still drawn up on the beach below the walls of the city. Perceiving this, some of Saladin’s men apparently broke into the city (this is only mentioned in the Itinerarium and not in Baha al-Din), but Richard and his knights reemerged from the mass of the enemy and first cleared the streets of Jaffa of Saracens and then “rallied” those that had fled toward the shore. (Richard had a reputation of using very crude and violent language to threaten/encourage his troops in the heat of battle.)What was happening, however, was that the morale of the Saracens was crumbling in the face of the fierce resistance put up by the Franks in general and Richard the Lionheart in particular. Baha al-Din describes the situation as follows:The Sultan was greatly annoyed at this and personally went around to the divisions urging them to attack and promising them good rewards if they would. Nobody responded to his appeal apart from his son al-Zahir, for he got ready to charge but the Sultan stopped him. I have heard that al-Janah, al-Mashtub’s brother, said to the Sultan, “Your mamlukes who beat people the day Jaffa fell and took their booty from them, tell them to charge.”[4]Baha al-Din then reports the even more remarkable turn of events:It was reported to me that the King of England took his lance that day and galloped from the far right wing to the far left and nobody challenged him. The Sultan was enraged, turned his back on the fighting and went to Yazur in high dudgeon. [5]And that in a nutshell was the difference in leadership style between the Sultan Salah ad-Din and King Richard the Lionheart: the Sultan urging others to risk their lives, and Richard facing an entire army on his own.The Sultan’s army withdrew, following him to Latrum, and shortly afterwards the main Frankish army arrived to relieve the city. The Franks retained control of Jaffa, and were in a position to refortify it. More important, however, as the above passages demonstrate, the morale of Saladin’s army had broken. It was this which opened the opportunity for a negotiated settlement at last. Within a month of the Battle of Jaffa a three year truce had been signed.The Battle of Jaffa is an important episode in Envoy of Jerusalem.[1] Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, Book 6, Chapter 21. The Itinerarium is a contemporary chronicle of the Third Crusade, much of it based on eyewitness sources, but heavily biased in favor of King Richard I of England.[2] Ibid.[3] Baha al-Din ibn Shaddad, The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin, (Ashgate, Crusade Texts in Translation) p. 225.[4] Baha al-Din, p. 225.[5] Baha al-Din, p. 225-226.