Form a coherent narrative from this contrarian morass. You suggest the shirt fibers have no evidentiary value because they can't be linked to Oswald's arrest shirt or any specific shirt. But for some inexplicable reason the FBI must coerce a witness to confirm that Oswald was wearing the arrest shirt from which fibers found on the rifle can't be linked? Why? Of course, even if the fibers could be linked to Oswald's arrest shirt, it wouldn't be necessary that they got on the rifle on the day of the assassination. They could have gotten on the rifle on some prior occasion. So what problem did the FBI have with this evidence? You are going around in endless circles.
You suggest the shirt fibers have no evidentiary value because they can't be linked to Oswald's arrest shirt or any specific shirt. But for some inexplicable reason the FBI must coerce a witness to confirm that Oswald was wearing the arrest shirt from which fibers found on the rifle can't be linked? Why? I'll tell you as soon as you tell me why the FBI needed to take the arrest shirt to Bledsoe's house prior to her testimony.
Of course, even if the fibers could be linked to Oswald's arrest shirt, it wouldn't be necessary that they got on the rifle on the day of the assassination. They could have gotten on the rifle on some prior occasion. True, but that would render the fibers meaningless and the WC clearly didn't want them to be meaningless.
So what problem did the FBI have with this evidence? It has already been explained to you. I'm sorry you don't understand it, but it's not really my problem.
Now, explain to me why the FBI needed to take the arrest shirt to Bledsoe before her testimony. I bet you won't because it's one of those questions you normally run away from, but I'm asking nevertheless.