Sorry, David, I have had it before.
I find it difficult to express myself. I am working on it.
According to J. J. Collins, Jewish
tradition related the end of the Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks to the
destruction of the temple, an interpretation that may already be implied in
Josephus: “Daniel also wrote about the empire of the Romans and that Jerusalem
would be taken by them and the temple laid waste.”
And according to Josephus:
“Alexander came into Syria, and took Damascus, and when he had obtained Sidon,
he besieged Tyre, when he sent an epistle to the Jewish high priest, to send
him some auxiliaries, and to supply his army with provisions; and that what
presents he formerly sent to Darius he would now send to him, and choose the
friendship of the Macedonians, and that he should never repent of so doing;
(318) but the high priest answered the messengers, that he had given his oath
to Darius not to bear arms against him and he said that he would not transgress
this while Darius was in the land of the living.” 
Alexander and his army were on their
way to Jerusalem to
destroy the city, when the priests met him and showed him that he featured in
prophecy. He was so impressed he that spared the city. Fact of the matter is
(and for whatever reason), Alexander never attacked Jerusalem.
Josephus referred to Daniel as “one
of the greatest prophets,” because not only did he prophesy future things, but
he also fixed the time during which these should come to pass. He was also of
the opinion that the book of Daniel was in existence prior to the arrival of
Alexander the Great in the fourth century BCE. He viewed the third kingdom of Dan. 2 as Greece, “from the west,” intimating that the
fourth would be Rome.
Elsewhere Josephus interprets the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanes as being
the fulfillment of prophecies made by Daniel in the 6th century BCE. He also
tells of a tower that Daniel had built at the height of his fame, at Ecbatana or Susa (according to Jerome’s copy) that
became the burial place of kings. This structure was still in existence in his
day, so his detractors could go and see it.
I believe “where there is smoke,
there is fire.” If none of this were true, he would have been ridiculed by his
enemies and detractors. Would Josephus have mentioned the above, knowing
that Daniel was only written 200 years before him? Would he not have mentioned
that Daniel was a Maccabean production? Speaking of the Maccabees, in the first
book of Maccabees (ca. 100 BCE), Daniel is viewed as one of “our
ancestors.” They make many references to the book of Daniel (1 Macc. 2:51-60 JB).
Would they have respected him if they knew he was a fraud and a liar? Just too
many coincidences there, I’m afraid.
And then, we haven't even touched on the language. The Hebrew of Daniel is written in the same style as Chronicles and Ezra. The Aramaic of Daniel can be classified as Imperial Aramaic (not Western Palestinian Aramaic as the Genesis Apocryphon found amongst the DSS).
 John J. Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel,
Hermeneia-series, p. 356, footnote 82. See Josephus, Antiquities, Book X,
Chapter XI, § 7 [10.276].
 Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of
Josephus: complete and unabridged. Peabody:
Hendrickson [Antiquities 11.317, 318].
 Josephus, Antiquities, Book X, Chapter XI, § 7
[10.267]; Book XI, Chapter VIII, § 5 [11.337]; Book X, Chapter X, § 4 [209,
210]; Book XI, Chapter VIII, § 5 [10.276]; Book X, Chapter XI, § 7 [10.264] (W. Whiston translation).