Argentia was not the paradise that many former residents portrayed it to be, but neither was it the insignificant “tiny little village” that many Americans and various authors portrayed it to be. Either through ignorance, or deliberate intentions, they downplayed the size of Argentia and its important role in the transportation of vital supplies to the communities on the western side of Placentia Bay. Seventeen U.S. Navy Command Histories — written by the highest official in Argentia to his superiors in Washington — make reference to the American takeover of Argentia in 1941, but in the most inaccurate manner.

A Command History was the annual classified report on all aspects of operations that was forwarded to the Department of the Navy in Washington by the commanding officer at Argentia. All of those reports allude to the fact that only 115 buildings had to be removed to make way for the U.S. Naval and U.S. Army Bases. The information in those Command Histories was a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. In reality 770 buildings and/or other structures — 160 of which were occupied family homes — were destroyed, and 833 people were evicted from their community. Such inaccurate information gave the American and Canadian public, as well as residents in other parts of Newfoundland, the wrong impression; they never knew the true price tag of the first and largest U.S. military installation outside the United States.

Several noted authors also portrayed Argentia as an insignificant piece of real estate that the Americans moved onto without any disruption or personal upheaval. In 1941, journalists Henry Vollam Morton and Howard Spring traveled to Argentia aboard the HMS Prince of Wales, to cover the Atlantic Meeting. Two years later, Morton published his impression of the event in Atlantic Meeting. In that book, he described his visit to Argentia by writing:

… And the name of this place was Argentia, one of the leased American bases. Buildings were rising on land that had never until then known anything except humble cod-fishing and curing station.

Argentia was small compared to London, where Morton spent a lot of time. However, had he taken the time to conduct some simple research, instead of blindly using the self-serving information the Americans fed to him, Morton would have known that Argentia was not a “humbler cod-fishing and curing station.”

Argentia was one of the ten largest and most viable communities in rural Newfoundland. With a new large herring factory, a new cottage hospital serving 52 communities around Placentia Bay, a railway terminal, a coastal boat terminal, two schools, a post office, a hotel, and more than a dozen thriving businesses, Argentia was known as the “industrial capital” of Placentia Bay. Supplies destined for communities throughout Placentia Bay from businesses in St. John's passed through Argentia on a daily basis.

In relation to Placentia Bay, Theodore A. Wilson stated in The First Summit, “On its shores, near the small town of Argentia, was being constructed a United States naval base and a small army installation.”

Again, the author used “chosen” information supplied by U.S. Navy officials who wanted to make their occupation of the area appear as having had a lesser social impact than it actually did. The U.S. Naval Operating Base was not “being constructed” near Argentia; it was replacing the entire community of Argentia.

In his book The Atlantic Campaign, Dan van der Vat wrote: “They were bound for Argentia, the base allocated to the Americans in the British colony. In December 1940, when the U.S. advance party arrived, the place was a ghost-town, all but abandoned when the silver mine from which it derived its name ran out.”

That statement is a prime example of the misinformation that the U.S. Navy officials purposely issued to American journalists and writers about its “overseas activities.” They did not want the American public — who did not want the United States involved in Britain 's fight against Germany — to view their government in a negative light. They did not want them to know that the U.S. government had the British authorities expropriate an entire community and evict all the residents so it could construct its military bases there.

Calling Argentia a “ghost town” showed the ignorance of van der Vat regarding the subject about which he was writing. His statements of misinformation showed that he did not research his topic very well. He made it look as though the U.S. military was doing the area a gargantuan favor. While the Americans initially provided much needed employment, what they left behind in 1994 far outweighs any of the benefits they created over a 54-year period. The environmental contamination they left behind will be causing problems for many, many generations to come.

In his book Mr. Roosevelt's Navy, Patrick Abbazia described Argentia as having very few redeeming features, especially in terms of climate. He stated: “Fog was a problem much of the year, and drifting ice in winter; planes could not land in the harbour when the wind blew from the south, southeast, or northeast. But aside from its strategic position on the great-circle route to Europe, Argentia had one virtue: it was available.”

Surely, if Abbazia had done any amount of research he would have learned that one of the primary reasons that the U.S. military chose Argentia was because of its large ice-free harbour. His “it was available” remark was not only misleading; it was demeaning to the people who were forced out of their homes in the middle of one of the harshest winters in the mid-1900s. Argentia was notorious for fog, but Abbazia was wrong about planes not being able to land in the harbour. During the first year of military operations, when U.S. Navy had no choice but to use Argentia harbour for takeoffs and landings, there was never a time when the planes could not land. Albeit, there were times when the landings were quiet rough, but not once did inclement weather prevent more than a thousand landings! Also, there were no recorded crashes during those harbour landings.

In his book The Battle of the Atlantic, Samuel Eliot Morison stated: “Argentia in 1940 was a ghost village, an extinct silver-mining settlement.”

That, too, was an example of someone hearing second- or third-hand stories and then proceeding to publish them as fact. That information was an outright lie. Argentia was never a “ghost village,” not even during transition from French to English occupation during the early-1700s. Although a silver mine was in operation at Broad Cove on and off for many decades, it contributed very little to the local economy. Argentia's economy was dependant on the cod and salmon fisheries, as well as the industrial activities that were conducted there.

All of the preceding quotes speak for themselves; it is obvious to anyone familiar with the Argentia region that they were based on hearsay rather than fact. Those authors presented the only information that was made available to them by the U.S. military. Their research consisted of talking with people who did not have any first-hand knowledge. With the exception of H. V. Morton, none of those authors had ever visited Argentia. All their “observations” were from a distance of thousands of miles.

Morton, Wilson, van der Vat, Abbazia, and Morison were the first to distort certain aspects of Argentia's history in writing. Many others have followed suit over the past six decades, especially those who tried to capitalize on the 50th anniversary of the American presence in Argentia.

It is not only in Argentia that the phenomenon of misrepresenting history has occurred. What is remarkable, however, is the silence and warmth with which the deceptive misrepresentation of Argentia's history has been accepted by the people in that part of Newfoundland. Even more astonishing is the involvement of Newfoundland media and political figures in perpetuating the myths and lies.

In 1940, the government of the United States presented the American forces as the benevolent protectors of freedom and the “American Way.” It did not want its military perceived to be anything but that in the eyes of the American people … especially because there was so much debate about the Neutrality Act. The U.S. military was also keenly aware that as many as fifty percent of all Americans were against any form of aggression on the part of the United States.

In order to present the public with a caring and benevolent image, the government of the United States, through its U.S. Navy officials, deliberately released misinformation about the acquisition of land for its first and largest military installation that was constructed in Argentia. The munificent image of the American armed forces would have been tarnished if it had become public knowledge that 833 Argentia residents were being arbitrarily uprooted from their way of life in the middle of a harsh winter, just because the U.S. Department of Defence preferred to have its naval and air bases on peninsular formations in strategic geographical positions.

U.S. military officials led the American people to believe that the American bases were being constructed in mostly deserted areas with the “least amount of disruption to nearby inhabitants.” Then again, U.S. military officials probably considered the disruption of the lives and futures of 833 people to be insignificant! If the Newfoundlanders had not been so reticent and acquiescent, local history may have unfolded much differently.