Implicit within Dervish's opinion that ISKCON may be riddled with "false gurus" is the assumption that there may in fact somewhere be an entity that is a "true guru". A scary prospect indeed.
I feel it is only a scary prospect to those who only see eastern religion in terms of ISKCON, TM, Sai Baba, and other talked about cults which found their way in the west. Or athiests who feel any type of submission in the name of religion is wrong. Guru disciple relationship is seen throughout Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and other offshoots. Sure, a plethora of false gurus existed. It's par for the course that unscrupulous people will see submission of the learner and crave that power. The meaning of Guru is "teacher". A student in the old world offered complete submission to the teacher. Even in the west, You saw this level of submission with Jesus and his disciples. Even in the western secular world, you would see this with master/journeymen craftsmen with their apprentices.
Am I here to advocate guru/disciple relationships? Hardly! It's a very dangerous concept. Ever since 1-2 Indian theologians took western disciples, many false guru charletans came westward to take advantage. It's almost impossible to find a teacher with pure intentions. Perhaps it's completely impossible today.