But that language -- of "loyalty", and sides -- is precisely the problem. Again, I stress that aside from his being Muslim, which we all knew already, there hasn't been any concrete accusation made against Khan. Nothing more than suggestion and innuendo. I'll accept that you are trying to put my best interests at heart (and not just mine either), but I find the way you are going about it, trying to set up some sort of divide between me and someone I have no connections to, nor am ever likely to. A barrier of distrust for no reason other than his religion. And I'm sorry but that is just not enough.
As and when Sadiq Khan actually does something that justifies ... whatever it is, I'll pay attention. Until then, I can do little about it anyway, so I may as well assume that someone who has no history of acting like a raging fundamentalist determined to destroy the west has no likely future of it either. Call it naive if you like, and maybe it is, but really it's just an extension of standard British principles of presumed innocence, or of not accepting "thought crime" as a thing (and I can't say I'm aware of any reason to accuse Khan of that either). Being Muslim is not in itself a crime, and not in itself a reason to fear, distrust, or even despise someone.