Have you any independent sources for that? Not doubting you, given your usual contributions but I haven't seen that allegation before.
After a cursory search I found this entry:
2014 Mandalay riots[edit]
In July a Facebook post emerged of a Buddhist woman being raped, supposedly by a Muslim man. In retaliation an angry, vengeful mob of 300 people started throwing stones and bricks at a tea stall. The mob went on to attack Muslim shops and vehicles and shouted slogans in Muslim residential areas.
[67] Two men — one Buddhist and one Muslim — were killed.
[68][69] Roughly a dozen people were injured.
[70] A curfew was imposed on 3 July.
[68][69]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perse...#Rohingya_persecution_and_mass_exodus_of_2017
As with other rapes in Pakistan and India at the time, it was not an isolated incident, but represented an ongoing "cultural practice" among the Muslims who don't consider Buddhists to be "of the book", and therefore according to the Koran. This is a known practice among Muslim communities and dates back to the first Islamic occupations, wherein the Muslim soldiers would lay in wait at a village well and rape every woman who came for water unless they converted to Islam and attired themselves accordingly. The Koran is quite clear about the cruelty that one is allowed to inflict upon non-Believers, for example:
Koran 8:12 - I will cast horror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore shall you decapitate them and cut off even their fingertips.
Koran 8:39 - Slay them all until there is no more unbelief, and the only religion belongs to Allah.
And the ever popular:
Koran 8:67 - It is not for the Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he has made a great slaughter in the land.
The Koran is also quite clear on this issue of owning non-Muslim women as slaves. This is referred to in the Qur'an as "ma malakat aymanukum" or "what your right hands possess". It is quite clear that Mohammed himself was quite an eager rapist, having sexually assaulted Juwairiya of the Bani Mustaliq, Saffiya of the Banu Nadir, and most cruelly Rayhanna of the Banu Quraisa, as well as his pedophilic relationship with is child bride Aisha. In short, Islam has historically always upheld the right of a Muslim man to rape a non-Muslim woman.
Now that rape culture was given free reign in India and beyond withe the Muslim Invasion of India in 1000 AD which is very conservatively estimated to have killed 80 million Hindus and enslaved many more. In fact demographic evidence suggests that the atrocity was ongoing for hundreds of years and many generations. The population of India went from 280 million in 1000AD to 200 million in 1500AD. All human populations grow by 3% per year, and it is normal for subsistence agricultural societies to aim for higher birthrates as more hands are needed to work the land and make the family rich. To see this society collapse by 80 million people over 500 years is demographic evidence of an atrocity that affected hundreds of millions of Hindu civilians over hundreds of years of completely ruthless and inhuman oppression, and probably over a billion dead. As further evidence consider that the name of the mountains the "Hindu Kush" literally means "The Slaughter of Hindus" because Muslims wanted to memorialize their efforts in stamping out Hinduism, and the mountains in question spelled death for the endless chain gangs of slaves being sent west to the slave markets.
The Rohingya Muslims were Bengali Muslims who come with all these cultural attitudes, and most were introduced into the area by the British in the 1920s and 30s. They were never welcome by the locals, and the reason given by the Burmese I have spoken to is that they had no respect for their women and children and attacked them when the opportunity presented itself. Given the behavior of Muslims elsewhere, I am strongly inclined to believe this, despite the whitewash of these issues that the Western Press seems to be engaging in for reasons that seem at odds with honest reportage. The Muslims are only ever portrayed as victims in the media, and I can't understand why a religion so at odds with Western Liberal attitudes and which is so outspoken in its contempt for our laws and way of life is being protected in this way. Buddhists seldom if ever attack people for no reason, history will attest to that, and it will also strongly attest to the fact that Islam was founded in blood and aggression and has never desisted.
As to the issue of terrorism in Rakhine state, here is a grab bag of writing on the issue:
This article details Al Quaeda operating in Myanmar:
http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/isis-al-qaeda-drawn-to-crisis-in-rakhine-state
A bit more vague:
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/09/india-rohingya-muslims-terror-ties-170918134840406.html
A bit more detailed:
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...ngya-crisis-to-recruit-malaysians-for-9226802
There are plenty of others, but this one is interesting for its links to Saudi Arabia:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/R...ts-in-Rohingya-crisis-put-Myanmar-in-hot-seat
As to the issue of who was burning the Rohingya villages, the entire campaign kicked off as the tensions were rising. Obviously the Myanmar troops and Rohingya militia were very eager for a fight. The Rohingya strategy was to stage a series of attacks against the Burmese troops, but in order to clear the area of Rohingya civilians they initially organised to have the Rohingya torch their villages. Of course the Myanmar troops and angry non-Rohingyas were all to happy to burn villages too. I am NOT suggesting the Burmese Buddhists are innocent of the burning, merely that the claim that the Rohingya didn't burn their own villages at all is also false as they had motive, means and opportunity to do just that. The motive was that burned villages would help them in their petition for refugee status, and provide them with effectively an opportunity for a mass migration to more prosperous countries, who could then fund the guerilla war in the area. Politically, given its authoritarian government, Myanmar's only friend is China, who also has its own Uigur Muslim issues, and Myanmar have no friends in the West, unlike the Muslims who have an increasing and partisan voice in the media, given the constant wars in the Middle East and the consequent proliferation of Muslim Journalists, and organizations such as Al Jazeera, which are pushing a very uncritical and one sided view of matters.
IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION: I am in no way suggesting that the Government and Forces of Myanmar are honest or innocent in this matter; they are a vicious authoritarian government and the current democratic reforms are shaky and largely unwelcome. What I strenuously object to is the notion that the Rohingya are innocent victims in all this, as is the portrayal in our media. There has been a solid effort to drown out all information to the contrary, but there is more to this story than Western media is letting on, and I urge people to remain skeptical of this snowstorm of the same one-sided stories being repeated ad nauseum.