Blunkett: "Proposals could have been more Draconian"
The proposals were given a second reading by a margin of 458 votes to five.
The BBC's political editor Andrew Marr said: "The government has won the vote very easily but it has not necessarily won the argument."
He said the government could expect further opposition from its own benches before the bill becomes law.
Controversial proposals
Home Secretary David Blunkett came under fire from all sides in the Commons over the bill's proposals.
Brian Sedgemore, one of four Labour MPs to vote against the government, said the legislation was "a ragbag of the most coercive measures that the best mandarin minds from the Home Office can produce".
In an impassioned speech, Mr Sedgemore said: "Not since the panic and hysteria that overcame the British establishment in the aftermath of the French Revolution has this House seen such draconian legislation."
Unrepentant
But Mr Blunkett was unrepentant.
Reminding MPs of the thousands who died on 11 September, he said even more Draconian measures could have been put forward by ministers.
But, he added: "It would have been wrong to do so."
"It was appropriate for us to be more circumspect and bring forward proportionate and reasonable measures," he said.
The terrorists had not only destroyed the World Trade Centre but had also "declared open season on all of us," he added.
Possible reprisals
In addition to the measures on detaining suspects, the 128 paragraph bill also includes proposals to tighten airport security, freeze suspected terrorists' funds and create a new offence of incitement to religious hatred.
Shadow home secretary Oliver Letwin said he supported some of the measures contained in the bill but he thought it was being pushed through parliament too quickly.
He said the Conservatives planned to table a number of amendments with the Liberal Democrats aimed at "improving" the bill.
Mr Letwin repeatedly urged the government to think again on the "internment" of terrorist suspects.
He warned this could lead to possible reprisals against British citizens abroad.
He said he would prefer Mr Blunkett to exclude or deport foreign undesirables rather than jailing them.
There was criticism too from Ulster Unionist MP Jeffrey Donaldson, who complained the plans did not apply to Irish republican groups such as the Real IRA.
'New demands'
Home Office Minister Beverley Hughes said she understood concerns that the legislation was being hurried through.
But she said it was necessary to act quickly and decisively because "the lengths these terrorists will go to, including their own death, makes new demands on our ability to anticipate their plans and therefore protect our people".
Under the government's proposals the law on detention of suspects will fall after five years and "there will be a debate every year for three hours" on the issue, she added.
Incitement ban 'wrong'
The Lib Dems and Conservatives also hit out at plans to include new laws banning incitement to religious hatred in the anti-terror legislation.
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Simon Hughes urged the home secretary to "consult more widely and relatively quickly on the religious incitement matters and legislate separately".
Mr Letwin said dealing with the threat of terrorism and the persecution of Muslim communities in the same legislation sent out the wrong message.
'No time for scrutiny'
MPs are angry at the lack of time they have been given to scrutinize a bill that will have serious implications for civil liberties.
In total, the Commons has been given just three days to look at the legislation, a process that would normally take several weeks.
Mr Blunkett is determined to see the Bill on the statute books by the Christmas recess.