Thomas Mahl's Desperate Deception includes a lot of information about British-sponsored efforts to influence America away from isolation and toward helping Britain against Nazi Germany. However his understanding of the public opinion polls of that period is extremely flawed. He claims (and some reviewers repeat) that the Gallup, Cantril, and Roper polls were "rigged" by British intelligence to produce a false picture of American public opinion. This is simply untrue. These pollsters used a wide variety of question wordings and posed a variety of alternatives to assess public opinion, and they all came up with the conclusion that - at least after the fall of France in 1940 - the great majority of the public favored "all aid to Britain short of war," even if giving such aid risked actually getting into the war. They did not, however, favor immediately declaring war against Germany and sending troops to Europe. That didn't win majority support until Pearl Harbor. (Hadley Cantril's Gauging Public Opinion (1944) gives many details of the pollsters' testing the limits of American willingness to become involved as do his subsequent articles in Public Opinion Quarterly.) As to the "British agent" in the Gallup organization, Mahl simply has it wrong. David Ogilvy, later a famous advertising man, worked for Gallup in studies of what audiences wanted in Hollywood movies; he resigned and went to work for British intelligence on Latin America. He had nothing to do with Gallup's questions on aid to Britain. See my article in the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Summer, 2003. Mahl claims that a poll sponsored by an anti-interventionist group produced very different findings from the Gallup and other published polls - it did not, rather finding very similar results. Mahl's information on the polls and the pollsters is very inaccurate, because he is trying to fit everything into his general thesis.