Inconceivable Logic

I have recently learned a little about Logic in my semantics class, and decided to make a logical diagram of Vizzini's reasoning in the Battle of Wits on the Princess Bride. I have used the film version, rather than the book version.
I know next to nothing about Logic, so if anyone has any corrections, let me know. It was mostly for fun, however, and all we can determine from Vizzini's logic is that he was trying to stall Westley all along and pull a fast one on him. Socrates and Galileo morons, eh? Well, who's the man who poisoned both the goblets and lived? Not you, Mr. Sicilian!

--------------------

An Attempt at a Logical Diagram of the Battle of Wits

Where v=Vizzini, w=Westley, a=australia, g1=Westley’s goblet, and g2=Vizzini’s goblet

Proposition 1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

clevermanPUT-INpoison<g2>∵clevermanKNOW<greatfoolREACH-FORg1>

~vFOOL     but     (wKNOW & wCOUNT-ON<~vFOOL>

    ~vCHOOSEg2                         ~vCHOOSEg1                  _   _  _ 

  

Proposition 2--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

iocaineCOME-FROMa & criminalsPEOPLEa & criminalsUSED-TO<~peopleTRUSTcriminals>

~vCHOOSEg2

wEXPECT<vKNOW{poisonORIGIN}>

~vCHOOSEg1

Proposition 3--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

wBEATgiant→wSTRONG         wBESTspaniard→wSTUDY

             wPUT-INg2            but     wLEARN<manMORTAL>

        ~vCHOOSEg2                   wPUT-FAR-AWAYpoison

                                                    ~vCHOOSEg2

--------------------