Agrippa Messiah

Was Agrippa the Messiah? The sources really do bear out the contention that Agrippa was regarded as the Messiah at some time. Now it is time to tidy up. This is what needs to be done now. a) In all cases, the reader needs to be shown to what extent the text has been condensed or paraphrased or both.
b) The first quote, starting, “Titus will make peace etc.” has no source that I could find. The word “strengthen” looks like a mistranslation.
(c) The two refs. to Daniel VII: 25 near the start need to be corrected. Daniel XII: 7 is in Hebrew, not Aramaic.
(d) The translation of Saadya’s note on IX: 24 is a long way off track in understanding the syntax, the condensation and paraphrasing depend on the original misunderstanding of the syntax. He says that prophecy ended with the building of the SECOND Temple, and was then replaced by the Bat Kol. The reference to the Third Temple, however, has been correctly understood.
(e) Correct Metsidat David to Metsudat David.
(f) Make it clear that Metsudat David re-interprets Rash’s words so as to give them a standard orthodox meaning. Saadya gives the same interpretation as Rashi, but although he is much earlier, he is deliberately not so explicit as Rashi, leaving it to the attentive reader to realise the implication.
(g) Near the end of the message, the words “which will be a curse”, are not only wrong, they weaken the clear evidence that Rashi is paraphrasing a document from 68 A.D. Translate “but he (Titus) will come to no good”. Nevertheless, Rashi’s words after that are an attempt at reconciling his source with the standard doctrine of his day.