Hello there!
[url]
http://translate.google.fr/translate?sl ... an&act=url[/url]

This french muslim site features a demonstration of the inimitability of the Quran with arguments we don't often hear in muslim apologetics. Admittely, his argumentation looks very eloquent, using complicated words and giving an impression of objectivity and honesty, indeed, instead of throwing about an endless list of "miraculous litterary qualities", the author discusses the "impressive" linguistic subtleties of some verses and put himself in the skeptic's shoes to conclude such features are at best neccessary but not sufficent for inimitability.

But as you scroll down the page, you see the author making strange arguments:

Numerology: he lists about eight pairs of semantically related words (like day/night, good deeds/wrong deeds, reason/light, and so on....) and claims each word of the pair occurs in the Quran as frequently as the other.

The Quran, he tells us, uses 36% of the three-letter words of Arabic while the most gifted writers are unable to use more than 5% in their entire book. Alas, he seems to have 'forgotten' to back up this claim....

And last but not least, he admits the ideas and themes in surahs look disjointed. What's his conclusion?
(prepare to face-palm)......the organization of themes in the Quran defies human logic => therefore God-did-it!
He anticipates the answer that an logic-defying organization of ideas could be the result of a crazy author, and dismisses it on the basis of the arguments i listed above... and concludes that he has provided the "indubitable" proof of the inimitability of the Quran.

What do you think of this "nice" piece of apologetics?

I haven't read the link so may be misunderstanding but...
What thematic organisation? Within suras or between suras? In the latter case, suras in the order of "revelation" or the current order by length? If by length, then the organisation has indeed been screwed up - by subsequent reorganisation by humans.
As for using more three-letter words than others - one might have thought that was a sign of writing for children rather than great erudition. Or using archaic redundant terms that have passed out of use.

Oh dear! I've skimmed through some more and found this

what a human would had the idea to include a passage in the history of Moses in a "chapter" called "Women"?

The answer, of course, is a document collector who found a shoulder blade wrapped in a piece of parchment and thought the fragment of a story on the bone was part of the story on the parchment. A human editor, in fact.

the organization of themes in the Quran defies human logic => therefore God-did-it!

It wasn't written by Mohammed, at best it was a collection of quotes and stickit notes troops made, all of which were collected and edited by Zayd ibn Thabit by command into a book of revelations before they were forever forgotten. Such blasphemy to accredit Thabit as the Prophet of god after Mo said there would be no other.