I'd take that with a grain of salt. I didn't see anything in the offical report that she attempted to fire a jammed rifle, whereas it did state a number of others tried to fire jammed rifles. 
Her company got lost, her humvee got hit by an RPG, and she crashed into another vehicle, breaking her legs, and her back, she tried to fire her weapon, it was jammed. She wakes up 3 hours later in excruciating pain, and she is being treated by civilian hospital workers who treat her compassionately. She gets rescued, and they videotape it. She finds out her best friend died, people are claiming that she did a rambo, was shot and stabbed, and that a guy she can't recall meeting in the hospital claims that she was being tortured in the hospital.
What do you expect from her? To pretend she is Rambo? To pretend that after suffering, that she thought it was a neat idea for her privacy to be violated by tv cameras being hooked up to Rangers so her rescue could be used for war propaganda? Yeah, she is just an ungrateful little witch.
I expect her not to publicly bash the Army for promoting the very incident from which she is now profiting.
Her privacy violated??? She was in the US Army, and a POW!
When you are a soldier, privacy isn't an issue. The U.S. government has a responsibility to capture indcidents on the battlefield accurately. There are teams of military personnel that are charged with deciphering what happened on the battlefield and this certainly (maybe most especially) extends to the rescue of a soldier. The film provided as precise a record of the rescue as possible..
Also, you said that her back was broken at the wreck, but Private Lynch admits that she tried to fire her M-16 but it jammed. If she did try to fight with a broken back, wouldn't that be, at least, valiant?
Is it Rambo? No, but it would certainly explain why the initial reports had her fighting valiantly. One, because it is what a soldier does and, two, she did try to fight, but her weapon jammed.
As far as she can remember, perhaps. I mean, the girl was raped and didn't remember it. The injuries she sustained and the circumstances surrounding the accident were enough to put anyone in shock. Who knows what kind of pain meds she was being given at the hospital (if any at all).
Her memories could easily be faulty.
Those weren't TV cameras hooked up for the sole purpose of getting her rescue filmed. All spec ops use those video feed systems for command and control purposes so the folks running the show can see what the shooters do. No different than gun camera footage in fighters and bombers. It's used as an intelligence tool.
That the Army decided to release the footage, without commentary, so that the good news about her rescue can be seen by all, was not some Machiavelian propaganda move.
All of the stuff about what did or did not happen during the firefight was based on eyewitness accounts (inaccurate as they turned out to be), by those members of the convoy that escaped capture.
"In war nothing is ever as bad, or as good, as it is reported to Higher Headquarters. Any reports which emanate from a unit after dark — that is, where the knowledge has been obtained after dark — should be viewed with skepticism by the next higher unit. Reports by wounded men are always exaggerated and favor the enemy." - General George S. Patton, War As I Knew It. 1947.
"The report of no incident that happens after dark should be treated too seriously. They are always overstated." - General George S. Patton, War As I Knew It. 1947.
I'd take that with a grain of salt. I didn't see anything in the offical report that she attempted to fire a jammed rifle, whereas it did state a number of others tried to fire jammed rifles.