This paper presents a discourse and content analysis of how the Islam-critical webpage WikiIslam presents and discusses the issue of apostasy from Islam. Capitalizing on the Fairclough’s discourse critical theories the paper explores articles and texts posted on WikiIslam under the thread “Islam and Apostasy”. In particular, the rhetoric employed in the webpage and the examples chosen for inclusion – e.g. threads such as “helpful hints for ex-Muslims” and “Help Others to Leave Islam” – are analysed and related to how Islam and Muslims are discussed as a “threat” for the West. Essentially, the paper argues that the examples and general talks about Islam and apostasy as found on WikiIslam are closely related to anti-Muslim discourses in Europe. Moreover, the way of presenting Islam as something different and dangerous is an essential part of a growing anti-Muslim tendency in cyberspace. Hence we are in a crucial need to document and analyse how this discourse is related to the public discussion about Islam in Western societies. By the help of a critical discourse and content analysis this paper aims to evaluate if and to what extent the postings on WikiIslam leave out alternative interpretations of apostasy that are to be found among Muslim theologians in historic and contemporary debates. The paper is situated in a theoretical discussion about conversion, apostasy and freedom of religion/religious critique. By analysing the content and the rhetoric employed in the webpage WikiIslam the paper tries to develop a new way of analysing public discussions about Islam and Muslims in the West as well as a new way of analysing the relationship between religion and media in general. By doing this, it aims to analyse if and to what extent the online discussions found on WikiIslam are different from offline discussions about apostasy, religious freedom, and public discussions about religion in the Western world. Finally, on a broader theoretical level, the paper addresses the highly problematic, yet fundamentally important questions of religious critique. Indeed, in an open and democratic society it should be legal and lawful to hold a critical opinion of a religious tradition, but how does a nuanced but critical discussion differ from a blunt, hostile or closed opinion? To gain trust in the public discussion about religion it is important to be able to differ between legal and fair critique and Islamophobic opinions about Islam and Muslims.