Many countries have different standards for invoking the line-item veto, if it exists at all.Each country or state has its own particular requirement for overriding a line-item veto.In either case, most scholars agree that chapters seven through twelve tell the story of the battles of the Near East, from the sixth century to the second and/or the first centuries B. The battles are between the four successive kingdoms of the Babylonians, the Medo-Persians or the Medians then the Persians, the Greeks, and possibly the Romans.Chapter eleven is the focus of most of the controversy, as, according to most scholars, it gives a very detailed account of the battles of Antiochus Epiphanes.The book of Daniel (composed by the man, the prophet Daniel) itself claims to have been written in the sixth century BC, indirectly.The author places himself in the midst of the exile, during "the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim..., Nebuchadnezzar, .to Jerusalem and besieged it." (Dan 1:1) This event we know to have occurred around 605 BC (Baldwin, pg.17), and this being the earliest chronological event in the book, gives us a general timeframe for reference.
The first six chapters are the history section, telling of a Jew named Daniel of royal descent, who was taken captive along with the rest of the people from the city of Jerusalem.An example of this came in August of 2012, when Dilma Rousseff vetoed portions of a new forestry law which had been criticized as potentially causing another wave of deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest.Dating to before the American Civil War, presidents including Ulysses S.If it weren't for the great details here, most people could assume that the book was written in the sixth century, and that the author got lucky with his vague allusions.But ever since the third century AD, when the neoplatonist, Poryphyry, write a work entitled Against Christians, questions have been raised about the authenticity of the work (Ferch, pg. Porphyry's contention is that the book must have been written in the second century BC, being merely historical narratives, since such long-range prophecies are impossible in his perspective of a closer systemic universe, void of any supernatural intervention. Driver's commentary on Daniel, proposing the same theory.