between the two. Not every criminal act is necessarily immoral and not every immoral act is necesarily criminal. For example refusing to serve in an army may be criminal but not immoral under some circumstances and vice versa serving an the same army may be immoral but not criminal. Criminal is a factual term - i.e has the applicable law been broken. Immoral is a judgemental term. A history book should distinguish between facts and judgements. (And that's without getting into the arguments that could be made that Britains actions were in fact moral, and also without getting into the fact if we are going to support idea that all historical narratives are equally valid then white southern slave owners had their own 'narrative' happens to have been that the blacks were inferior uncivilized pagans who actually benefited by being brought to Christianity and having the guiding hand of Europeans to civilize them.
Army: Blast in Korean DMZ wounds two South Korean soldiers (Reuters)
from the article: PA adopts textbook, banned in Israel, offering both sides' narratives