I'm looking at it right now and am struggling to understand how you interpreted his statement as Strike running on Tether. I see exactly one mention of Tether in the article:
>Strike then takes the bitcoins and automatically converts them back into USDT (synthetic digital dollar known as Tether) using its real-time automated risk management and trading infrastructure.
So the user has an *option* of Tether if the prefer, how does that equate in your mind to "a tether scam"?
Followed immediately by:
>What if an El Salvador user wants local currency in exchange for their Strike USDT balance? Are they stuck with synthetic digital dollars? Nope.
>Remember, Strike remains interoperable with the Bitcoin and Lightning networks. We don’t need to install Strike network tellers and ATMs around the world, we are built on top of an open network, the work has already been done for us.
So are you just choosing to ignore statements that do not conform to your narrative or did you skip this portion? As it directly contradicts your previous statement of Strike not running on Bitcoin / Lightning.