Earlier this month the European Commission caved in to pressure from biotech companies by deciding to end its moratorium on the approval of new genetically modified foods. The moratorium was put in place two years ago to address concerns from consumers, environmental groups, and environmental ministers of several European countries about the lack of research into the safety of GM foods.

Well, to hell with the precautionary principle. Instead, the European Commission proposed new regulations to replace the moratorium. The new rules would settle for allowing new GM foods on the market, as long as they're labeled. The commission is in such a hurry to save biotech companies' profits that it recommended that the new regulations go into effect as soon as the European parliament passes them (probably by the end of this year), instead of waiting until all the governments of the various member nations approve and adopt them, as is the usual practice (a process that could take two years or longer). At least part of the reason for the change is fear and intimidation. One EU official, Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstrom, admitted that not making this change could leave the European Commission open to lawsuits from huge biotechnology companies like Monsanto. And how would Monsanto sue the European Commission? Through the WTO, naturally.--Maria Tomchick

Two Down, 10,000 To Go: If you want a fat-laden, sugar-infested McBurger, you still won't be able to get it in the International District, thanks to a valiant culinary defense mounted by an alliance of community groups led by the Interim Community Development Association.

The ICDA--an advocacy group that develops affordable housing in the I.D.--and others mounted a successful drive opposing the location of a new McDonald's franchise at 5th and Jackson, in a prime spot across from Paul Allen's new Union Station development and close to the two new publicly financed stadiums. McDonald's executives announced last week that they wouldn't be pursuing the new location, and, according to McDonald's regional real estate manager Donald Becka, the reason was "our ability to be successful there both immediately and well into the future...There is a fair amount of dissent to make it questionable." Viva la dissent! --Geov Parrish

Last week the leaders of the world's eight richest nations--also known as the "G-8"--met for three days in Okinawa, Japan. And what did they talk about? Was it nuclear weapons, the global economy, financial markets, trade issues, terrorism, drugs, or any of the usual subjects that are of interest to the global elite? No. They discussed the spread of infectious diseases, global warming, universal education, the debt burden of poor nations, and how to "curtail extreme poverty." Not that they made much headway, of course. It's easier for rich nations to commiserate about these subjects than for them to come up with a real action plan or the money to fund one. But it's been quite some time since the leaders of the U.S., Canada, Britain, Italy, France, Germany, Russia, and Japan have even let such words pass their lips. Thanks to the efforts of groups protesting the WTO meeting in Seattle, the World Bank and IMF meetings in D.C., the Asian Development Bank meeting in Thailand, and other successive and successful protests, the G-8 can no longer ignore these problems. And equally revealing was the admission that the WTO multilateral trade talks needed to be "jump-started," because they haven't recovered the momentum lost since last November in Seattle--an admission that the massive WTO protests were a major setback for global trade (more so than anyone could have expected).

As a happy aside, the Japanese government came under sharp criticism for spending $750 million (about $300 million of it on security) to host the G-8 meeting, which is about three times what it cost to host previous meetings. NGOs appropriately pointed out that the money could have been better spent to relieve the debt burden of poor nations; that amount alone could erase the debt of a small country like Gambia or Equatorial Guinea.--M.T.

The logic of justice, Chiapas style: Salvador Lopez Gonzalez of Chiapas was sentenced to prison on July 26, for a June 10 ambush in which seven police officers were killed. Lopez Gonzalez, a Zapatista sympathizer, was arrested July 10 for possession of 63 grams of marijuana and later charged with taking part in the ambush. The Fray Bartolme de las Casas Center for Human rights issued a statement saying the sentence "presupposes the absurd." A member of a PRI backed (anti-Zapatista) paramilitary organization has also been sentenced for the same murders. The center points out that it is incomprehensible that both pro- and anti-Zapatista forces took part in the ambush. The center says that the route the investigation has taken has been for the purpose of shielding the true perpetrators of the crime, and calls for the release of Lopez Gonzalez. --Troy Skeels

What is it with the Extortionate Music Project? Aside from being extremely ugly--along with the new library, this seems to be a requirement of modern, edgy architecture in Seattle--the new interactive museum is drawing an unusual amount of free publicity and advertising from the region's TV stations and newspapers. And how did this quasi-private, money-generating scam come to be housed on public property in the Seattle Center? Allen seems to be able to get anything he wants from a supine city eager to do his bidding; he is quietly remaking two sections of town--Union Station and South Lake Union--in his image with virtually no public debate or adherance to a neighborhood plan.

Finally, why does it cost 20 bucks--excuse me, $19.95, and I'm sure Allen will miss the extra nickel--to get in? Allen may be wanting to promote the idea that the E.M.P. is the equivalent of a concert-going experience, complete with Ticketmaster surcharges, but with a ticket price that high it ensures that the artists and youth who make the rock and roll he is supposedly celebrating can't afford to get in. Maybe one of the world's richest men simply wants more money. It's a shame the city is cooperating in the venture. But then, we're building a free football stadium for the guy, too, so why shouldn't he assume that we're chumps? --G.P.