Infiltrators in ISKCON, ​who are they?

"Infiltrators" had distorted the teachings of Srila Prabhupada. They kept saying this on Vedic Inquirer. Being acquainted with the history of the movement, I had never heard of this conspiracy.

As a new fellow on the forum , I was not yet perceived as an outcast, so I asked who these infiltrators were, and what the members of Vedic Inquirer meant by this. Not receiving any reply, I try to figure out what was going on. They called some of Prabhupada's early followers "infiltrators", given their suspicious and criminal acts, i.e. Bhagavan, Kirtananda or Bhavananda, just to name a few of them. 

I told them that such a point of view is not realistic, since the first members who joined the movement were trained by Srila Prabhupada personally. Take Kirtananda for example, he was the most eccentric of the early disciples and very close to him. He cannot be called an infiltrator (unless one believes that Srila Prabhupada had no psychological perception or any yogic powers. Is this possible?). 

Lokanatha Swami was one of Prabhupada's first disciples in India. Now, he is charged with pedophile crimes by members of the Krishna Consciousness movement, mostly Westerners (since he is worshiped in India as a Saint). Despite of this, how can he be called an infiltrator? 

This amalgam led to avoid the problem; the evil is coming from within the movement, a consequence of the structural weakness of the organization, of the internal politics, and of the philosophy. Deep problems, in fact.

Silence. No one will respond. On the contrary, they began to smear me as one of those who defends pedophiles. 

One day, Saraswati, came with a video of someone on a stage saying to an audience that "Bhavananda is the father of the Mayapur complex."

What she did was to edit the video and to cut it just before the devotee says: "Prabhupada said, that Bhavananda is the father of Mayapur." The clip that Saraswati published run like this: "Bhavananda is the father of Mayapur". Therefore, everyone on the forum was upset by this assertion, witch is nonetheless a weird glorification of Bhavananda. 

I started to realize that the method they are using to get rid of the abusers in the movement was flawed, because of the administration and the members are not willing to question the very causes in our philosophy that brought these grave derives. For example, If Krishna is not responsible, if Dhritarashtra is not responsible, if Prabhupada is not responsible, how do we justify that so many calamities took place while they were in charge!? Were they in charge or not? They declare -to get around the difficulty- although they were in charge, they had no responsibility for the results and the crimes severely going on in ISKCON.

November 12 2023

More on the subject: Things are getting weird on Vedic Inquirer